User Profile

Forum Activity by crumbsroom

I was called to jury and ultimately selected but stood up to voice protest to the judge claiming I would be biased towards the crime being tried and so was immediately expelled. What I said wasn't entirely true but considering the fact that I have serious reservations about the whole idea of juries and have a fundamental problem with them, on top of the fact that this particular case was regarding a serial child molester and I am not in any way willing to subject myself to being witness to evidence or testimony of that nature, I am at complete moral ease with my lie to the court. As I was walking out and those who had been chosen to be the jurors watched me leaving, they all told me they wished they had done what I had done, regardless of the fact that I came off like a total spaz in the courtroom

And, to the point, yes, this movie shows some of the fundamental troubles of being tried by your peers who don't really want to fulfill their obligation to the court, are put out by the intrusion into their life, and are almost always entirely ignorant towards the nature of the law. Trial by judge has its own very serious concerns, but I don't nearly have the same problems with it as I do the jury system.


May 22, 2017 12:48 AM
Rumpled 4 Skin

Crumbsroom = Bad Cinema

I prefer the term 'quality challenged'
May 22, 2017 12:06 AM
Katherine Waterson.
Aubrey Plaza
Samantha Bee
Kristen Wiig

I have no need for ten picks.
May 22, 2017 12:04 AM
Black PhilipYou mean from the acclaimed author JG Ballard like it says on the poster you posted?

I'll give you a point for being correct.

But I'll also subtract two, just because I feel like it.


May 21, 2017 4:02 AM
jasper de large
crumbsroom
jasper de largeElitism is just kinda gross.

Is it 'elitism' or is it simply some people find convention boring? There is nothing wrong with liking anything on a visceral level, and I don't have a lot of time for those who develop their identities around slagging off fans or bands who are into things they find subpar. I personally find those who endless rag on the lameness of Nickelback pretty much just as boring as Nickelback themselves. But, that being said, there is nothing wrong with looking for things that feel new or different or challenging, or are simply just a cut above. If that's elitism, whatever, I'll own it. But I hardly see it as being anything even remotely bad.

I'm talking about when people really take a steaming frothy piss on other groups in a spiteful way, as if those "shitty" bands hurt them. Then it veers into elitism. It's not elitism to be merely discerning.

When you read through some of the reviews in Pitchfork, at least from the 2000s, there is evident elitism. I read some reviews of albums that spent more time criticizing the people perceived to represent the band's fans rather than the actual substance of the album being reviewed. It's very tribal, like in the high-school way.


If you're talking about the earlier years of Pitchfork, they were unbearably awful. They were the type of people who should have music taken away from them forever. Some would say they are still this awful, but I personally think they've come a long way in being less strident the last few years.

And I am definitely not one who is interested in those who are fans of art for the cliques they can create around it. So in that way I'll agree with you. Being someone who at one point was very much into what people would call punk music, the disdain that community showed for anything that wasn't catering exactly to their sensibilities, made me quickly realize I hated anyone who had become dogmatic towards what they felt any type of art was allowed to do. People should be allowed to be really vocal about what they like or what they don't, and please argue about it as passionately as possible, but please try not to come to the table that there is some preconceived and absolute notion of what is good and what is bad. And there is certainly no reason to start sniffing off the character of a person if they happen to like something you don't. If you hate something, have the courtesy to at least try and respectfully explain yourself (or at least semi-respectfully). Otherwise, fuck off, because you suck.
May 21, 2017 3:40 AM
[img]https://s1.postimg.org/uhrlcmh27/highrise.jpg[/img]

Is this movie meant to be as big of a mess as it is? It's hard to tell. Considering his previous films, Wheatley seems to revel in disrupting genre conventions by the scene (Kill List), or to create a world that is deliberately immune to decoding through any earthly logic (A Field in England), so it is hard to glean how much of this unspooled monstrosity is deliberate, and how much is simply because he lost his way. ? The fact that this film seems as if it wants to be understood, regardless of its eccentricities, seems to be a bit of a sign that maybe this one is just a failure since it doesn't appear terribly interested in following through on any of the narrative promise it keeps teasing the audience with. Instead it just lurches from one peculiar set piece to another, often feeling as if large sections of the films connective tissue has be excised, or maybe just never filmed. I got the general gyst of what this movie was going for, but when I try and parse what it actually is in real time, I was just left shrugging in mild bafflement. There are interesting ideas here (likely supplied by Selby's novel, I haven't read it), good performances, funny scenes, and profoundly weird moments that deserve to be seen. But it just simply doesn't come together. Maybe Wheatley didn't want it to. But I did.

5.5/10
May 21, 2017 3:27 AM
jasper de largeElitism is just kinda gross.

Is it 'elitism' or is it simply some people find convention boring? There is nothing wrong with liking anything on a visceral level, and I don't have a lot of time for those who develop their identities around slagging off fans or bands who are into things they find subpar. I personally find those who endless rag on the lameness of Nickelback pretty much just as boring as Nickelback themselves. But, that being said, there is nothing wrong with looking for things that feel new or different or challenging, or are simply just a cut above. If that's elitism, whatever, I'll own it. But I hardly see it as being anything even remotely bad.
May 21, 2017 2:30 AM
Apex Predator
crumbsroom
Apex Predator Green Day

Now we are getting down to the brass tacks of bands I actually hate. I would take Live over these guys any day. Just can't stand pretty much all of those power pop bands. Ugh.

Power pop? That's a curious designation for a band that started out as punk. They may have mellowed some over the years, but they still can bring it.

I'm sure some would be happy to welcome bands like Green Day under the punk umbrella, but I wouldn't be one of them. Fast paced melodic guitar based songs really shouldn't be the only qualifier. To me punk was a broad genre of bands who took to the philosophy of learning on the job to heart, creating music that was both immediate, individualistic and deeply personal. As a result punk music allowed artists to reach beyond the standard structures of normal pop songs and conventional ways of arranging their music and playing their instruments. Yes, it's a vague term when looked at like this, but its broadness was part of its appeal. Now punk music has become streamlined to such a degree over the last thirty years it now means little more than standard verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus-chorus song, just played a little louder and faster, and for the most part, completely competently in a conventional sense. It is now virtually anyone who has followed in the footsteps of the Descendents or Angry Samoans, bands who could write short and sweet songs with attitude, yet those who have had success with this formula over the last few decades (Green Day, Offspring, Blink 182, Sum 41, Simple Plan) have neither the immediacy, danger or even the quality of songs to meet the bar of the bands they are essentially cribbing from.



May 21, 2017 2:26 AM
Apex Predator Green Day

Now we are getting down to the brass tacks of bands I actually hate. I would take Live over these guys any day. Just can't stand pretty much all of those power pop bands. Ugh.
May 21, 2017 1:48 AM
Black PhilipMy God. You guys are adding insult to injury by talking about crap like Candlebox and Everclear (or as I call them Everjunk) in an RIP thread. Take it somewhere else like a "crappy music" thread.

If you want to talk about Chris Cornell, go ahead. Otherwise stop policing how other people post. We're at the point here that any activity here should be welcomed. And it's not like you don't constantly derail threads with completely irrelevant shit all of the time, so don't play like you're not guilty of exactly the same thing you're bitching about here.
May 21, 2017 1:44 AM
jasper de large
I still like the album.

They're an inoffensive band, and I actually really don't have any actual hatred towards them. If anything, their inoffensiveness is their greatest crime. Ultimately, I just found Throwing Copper to be fairly unexceptional, featuring a lead singer who seemed like a big douche. I just felt like teasing Izzy for shruggingly bringing up a band I'd almost completely forgotten about.

And, hey, talking about 90's bands that people should forget about, what about Soul Asylum? I pretty much hated their breakthrough record, but I have a fondness for Let Your Dim Light Shine. Haven't listened to it in at least fifteen years though, so I could be eating those words pretty soon.
May 21, 2017 1:31 AM
Izzy Black

As for Chance, he's not a great singer, certainly not as good of one as Childish Gambino, to whom he's often compared, but I loved that SNL performance he had with Kanye. His style of singing isn't technical. I like the timbre of his voice and it goes well with his aesthetic, particularly when he goes in and out of singing to rapping in such a way that it's hard to mark where the singing begins and the rapping ends.

This and the rest of the Chance defense cover anything I could possibly muster up against Janson's slander. Timber was the word I was looking for last night but the scotch kept me from finding, so I just went to sleep. I love the sound of his voice, regardless of any of its technical limitations.


May 20, 2017 4:17 PM
Izzy BlackAlso liked Throwing Chopper. *shrug*

Call it what you will but I'm pretty sure this is the most praise this album has received in the last 20 years.

May 20, 2017 4:13 PM
First Izzy praises Live. Next Janson disses Chance the Rapper. What is the world coming to?
May 20, 2017 5:30 AM
Izzy BlackAlso, I should note: I have a pretty forgiving ear when it comes to popular music, pretty much all across the spectrum. It's peculiar I don't extend this same level of charity to popular film.

I've got no issue with pop music at all. I take deep pleasure in 90's Euro dance music, like more boy band songs than I should, think the Spice Girls "Say You'll Be There" is one of the songs I'm most fond of from that decade, and untold other amounts of embarrassments With both music and film and I can be very much about what many might consider lowest common denominator shit. Of course the critics are all wrong, though.

Unfortunately I don't have this allowance with books and paintings. I'm pretty limited in what I will tolerate in either of these fields. I really dislike way too many respected authors and visual artists and I actually sometimes wish I could stop thinking so many of them are so unbearably awful.
May 20, 2017 4:08 AM
Izzy Blackespecially if we go off rock and talk music generally, but I know you're a hip-hop head, so I don't need to tell you that (and I'm going to assume, given this, you're probably electro/house/trip-hop friendly too, e.g. Portishead, Massive Attack, what have you)

Yes. This is 90's music that is more in line with what I like about that decade now.
May 20, 2017 3:50 AM
Izzy BlackAlso liked Throwing Chopper. *shrug*

I was just about to approve of the supporting hand you offered Bush, they really weren't that bad, but now I'm pretty sure we're enemies.

That being said though, I actually think I kinda liked the album Live put out after this, so I should probably offer up my own *shrug*
May 20, 2017 3:49 AM
Izzy BlackThis is a bit of a pivot. You initially said early 90s alt rock, but here, you're limiting yourself to not just (mostly Seattle) grunge, but popular Seattle grunge, which gives you barely a handful of bands. In that case, OK yeah, I mean it's not like I'm constantly playing back STP, Pearl Jam, and Nirvana albums either.

Not really so much a pivot as just clarifying how I expressed myself badly in my initial post. I was speaking from a personal place, where I was talking very specifically about the music me or my friends were listening to at that point in my life. When it came to that stuff, stuff I liked quite a bit at the time, only a few of those records I loved so much back then have retained any kind of real fire for me all these years later.

But it's true, I do generally have a bit of a ingrained 90's music negative bias. If someone were to ask me what my least favourite decade in popular music is (starting with the 50's) 90's is usually the one I gravitate to. Even the bands from the nineties that I discovered I really liked after the fact, are disproportionately under represented when I gush about albums I get really excited about.

I guess I just like other stuff better.
May 20, 2017 3:19 AM
Oxnard Montalvo
Oxnard MontalvoI'm on the belief that the Trump-Russia connection is probably way less nefarious than many people think. but Trump isn't doing himself any favors by preventing the investigation from unfolding on its own.

on second thought, I should have clarified that my belief is that things are less nefarious than what many Trump supporters think people like me seem to to think about the Russia-Trump stuff. but that's just so I can say, "well yeah it's not like that, but there's enough we already know for sure and all these unanswered stuff about etc etc etc"

maybe I'm just trying to prepare myself for anything less than James Comey saying, "Trump personally asked Russia to straight-up influence the election" during his testimony. because I also feel like unless that happens there will always be those unconvinced that anything "bad" took place.

but anyway I'm probably just trying to get a handle on what is happening and if this is really happening then holy fuck! this is really happening?!?!

I get where you're coming from since I was once there too, but for the past few weeks I've been firmly in the camp of, yeah, this is really happening. Personally I'd prefer not to be here, because most people I know who froth at the mouth about Trumps Russia connections are people I really would rather not be associated with, but here we are. It's happening. And God knows what happens from here.
May 20, 2017 2:53 AM
jasper de large
I totally see what you guys are saying, but it's really a no-win situation. If they don't have the rapport and quips and the "cheesy" camaraderie, then they are flat, and if they are flat, we don't remember them at all, and critics ding the movie for its characters having "no personality."

I have no issue whatsoever with the use of broad stereotypes in Aliens, but the notion that if a director doesn't go this route that character won't be fleshed out beyond flatness and that the audience won't remember them is nonsense. The approach Cameron uses in Aliens works for the type of movie it is, so this isn't a knock against it, but let's not act like there aren't many different ways to make characters resonate.

That being said, Aliens is pretty good (though I'm finding it to have diminishing returns through the years), but Alien is pretty much an unqualified masterpiece. Haven't seen any of the other ones. I'm definitely curious in seeing all of them (even Prometheus) so I'm not sure why that hasn't happened yet.

May 20, 2017 2:29 AM