The Big Wheel - why?

[savagegrace26]

And stop projecting sh*t like I feel "threated" because you don't like what I like. Seriously, stuff like that is what pisses me off. You assuming that you know where I'm coming from and that "I feel threatened by the fact that I don't like the movie that you really like" is unbelievably simplistic and patronizing.

 

I was hoping we could have a conversation and was offering my views on that speific style of editing because I know how fast editing gets critized a lot (especially around here with the CA and Rio dvd's). No more, no more less. And then you respond with more inane patronizing bs about life being not "black and white" and me being "threatened".

 

Forgive me for assuming that you actually may have had something informative and worthwhile to say. My error.

Edited October 8, 2014 by savagegrace26

[LedRush]

You can't simply say it "sucks" without seeing the framework and context. It's a highly acclaimed movie and I consider it one of the best films of the 2000's. Certainly the most powerful.

 

Sure I can say the editing sucks. It sucks. It would turn me off of watching it any further.

 

Well that would be your loss. Your words are very elegant by the way.

 

The first five minutes of a movie can make or break it. Just like the first pages of a book. It can either pull you in or make you lose interest. Fast editing makes me lose interest.

 

The first five minutes can do that? Really? Thanks for letting me know...

 

Just because you can't deal with that particular style doesn't mean that it "sucks". Everything can't be the same. I've seen the entire movie and the editing style is perfectly suited to the narrative.

 

Now I think about it maybe they started off the movie like that as they're way of warning the viewer...if you can't handle this shut it off now because it's not an easy film to watch. The content becomes hard to digest as the film progresses and not so much the editing. It was an obvious artistic decision to use that editing style to convey something. It in no way "sucks" there is a designed purpose to it. It's so easy just to be dismissive with something you don't like. There's artistic intentions.

 

They could have started the film off with some extreme violence (which does occur throughout the movie) instead they conveyed the uncertainty and discomfort via the editing.

 

Here's a brief synopsis:

Two boys growing up in a violent neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro take different paths: one becomes a photographer, the other a drug dealer.

 

Life is not black-and-white. You take everything people say that way. just because my opinion is that the editing sucks doesn't mean it's wrong, no more than your opinion that it's the best thing since sliced bread. Don't be so threatened by peoples opinions.

 

I'm not threatened by them nor did I say it's the best thing ever.

 

I respect opinions that present actual reasoning behind them. Not offhand remarks like "it sucks" which is nothing more than a dismissive attack.

 

Don't know where you're getting "threatened" from. Am I "threatened" because I want people to actually put thought into the things they say? Maybe I just expect too much from people.

 

I actually feel the same way on your opinions on lots of these issues...it's like you're just throwing shit out there with no thought. And when you get challenged, you get very defensive and give very bad justifications. I'll respect different opinions, but I want them to be rational and based on facts.

[savagegrace26]

You can't simply say it "sucks" without seeing the framework and context. It's a highly acclaimed movie and I consider it one of the best films of the 2000's. Certainly the most powerful.

 

Sure I can say the editing sucks. It sucks. It would turn me off of watching it any further.

 

Well that would be your loss. Your words are very elegant by the way.

 

The first five minutes of a movie can make or break it. Just like the first pages of a book. It can either pull you in or make you lose interest. Fast editing makes me lose interest.

 

The first five minutes can do that? Really? Thanks for letting me know...

 

Just because you can't deal with that particular style doesn't mean that it "sucks". Everything can't be the same. I've seen the entire movie and the editing style is perfectly suited to the narrative.

 

Now I think about it maybe they started off the movie like that as they're way of warning the viewer...if you can't handle this shut it off now because it's not an easy film to watch. The content becomes hard to digest as the film progresses and not so much the editing. It was an obvious artistic decision to use that editing style to convey something. It in no way "sucks" there is a designed purpose to it. It's so easy just to be dismissive with something you don't like. There's artistic intentions.

 

They could have started the film off with some extreme violence (which does occur throughout the movie) instead they conveyed the uncertainty and discomfort via the editing.

 

Here's a brief synopsis:

Two boys growing up in a violent neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro take different paths: one becomes a photographer, the other a drug dealer.

 

Life is not black-and-white. You take everything people say that way. just because my opinion is that the editing sucks doesn't mean it's wrong, no more than your opinion that it's the best thing since sliced bread. Don't be so threatened by peoples opinions.

 

I'm not threatened by them nor did I say it's the best thing ever.

 

I respect opinions that present actual reasoning behind them. Not offhand remarks like "it sucks" which is nothing more than a dismissive attack.

 

Don't know where you're getting "threatened" from. Am I "threatened" because I want people to actually put thought into the things they say? Maybe I just expect too much from people.

 

I actually feel the same way on your opinions on lots of these issues...it's like you're just throwing shit out there with no thought. And when you get challenged, you get very defensive and give very bad justifications. I'll respect different opinions, but I want them to be rational and based on facts.

 

What facts? Like release dates?

 

Or Google searches for others opinions? Or how you perceive a crowd is reacting?

 

I've never seen you present one "fact".

[LedRush]

You can't simply say it "sucks" without seeing the framework and context. It's a highly acclaimed movie and I consider it one of the best films of the 2000's. Certainly the most powerful.

 

Sure I can say the editing sucks. It sucks. It would turn me off of watching it any further.

 

Well that would be your loss. Your words are very elegant by the way.

 

The first five minutes of a movie can make or break it. Just like the first pages of a book. It can either pull you in or make you lose interest. Fast editing makes me lose interest.

 

The first five minutes can do that? Really? Thanks for letting me know...

 

Just because you can't deal with that particular style doesn't mean that it "sucks". Everything can't be the same. I've seen the entire movie and the editing style is perfectly suited to the narrative.

 

Now I think about it maybe they started off the movie like that as they're way of warning the viewer...if you can't handle this shut it off now because it's not an easy film to watch. The content becomes hard to digest as the film progresses and not so much the editing. It was an obvious artistic decision to use that editing style to convey something. It in no way "sucks" there is a designed purpose to it. It's so easy just to be dismissive with something you don't like. There's artistic intentions.

 

They could have started the film off with some extreme violence (which does occur throughout the movie) instead they conveyed the uncertainty and discomfort via the editing.

 

Here's a brief synopsis:

Two boys growing up in a violent neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro take different paths: one becomes a photographer, the other a drug dealer.

 

Life is not black-and-white. You take everything people say that way. just because my opinion is that the editing sucks doesn't mean it's wrong, no more than your opinion that it's the best thing since sliced bread. Don't be so threatened by peoples opinions.

 

I'm not threatened by them nor did I say it's the best thing ever.

 

I respect opinions that present actual reasoning behind them. Not offhand remarks like "it sucks" which is nothing more than a dismissive attack.

 

Don't know where you're getting "threatened" from. Am I "threatened" because I want people to actually put thought into the things they say? Maybe I just expect too much from people.

 

I actually feel the same way on your opinions on lots of these issues...it's like you're just throwing shit out there with no thought. And when you get challenged, you get very defensive and give very bad justifications. I'll respect different opinions, but I want them to be rational and based on facts.

 

What facts? Like release dates?

 

Or Google searches for others opinions? Or how you perceive a crowd is reacting?

 

I've never seen you present one "fact".

 

Really? Never? This confirms what I'm saying about how you address others' points.

[savagegrace26]

You can't simply say it "sucks" without seeing the framework and context. It's a highly acclaimed movie and I consider it one of the best films of the 2000's. Certainly the most powerful.

 

Sure I can say the editing sucks. It sucks. It would turn me off of watching it any further.

 

Well that would be your loss. Your words are very elegant by the way.

 

The first five minutes of a movie can make or break it. Just like the first pages of a book. It can either pull you in or make you lose interest. Fast editing makes me lose interest.

 

The first five minutes can do that? Really? Thanks for letting me know...

 

Just because you can't deal with that particular style doesn't mean that it "sucks". Everything can't be the same. I've seen the entire movie and the editing style is perfectly suited to the narrative.

 

Now I think about it maybe they started off the movie like that as they're way of warning the viewer...if you can't handle this shut it off now because it's not an easy film to watch. The content becomes hard to digest as the film progresses and not so much the editing. It was an obvious artistic decision to use that editing style to convey something. It in no way "sucks" there is a designed purpose to it. It's so easy just to be dismissive with something you don't like. There's artistic intentions.

 

They could have started the film off with some extreme violence (which does occur throughout the movie) instead they conveyed the uncertainty and discomfort via the editing.

 

Here's a brief synopsis:

Two boys growing up in a violent neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro take different paths: one becomes a photographer, the other a drug dealer.

 

Life is not black-and-white. You take everything people say that way. just because my opinion is that the editing sucks doesn't mean it's wrong, no more than your opinion that it's the best thing since sliced bread. Don't be so threatened by peoples opinions.

 

I'm not threatened by them nor did I say it's the best thing ever.

 

I respect opinions that present actual reasoning behind them. Not offhand remarks like "it sucks" which is nothing more than a dismissive attack.

 

Don't know where you're getting "threatened" from. Am I "threatened" because I want people to actually put thought into the things they say? Maybe I just expect too much from people.

 

I actually feel the same way on your opinions on lots of these issues...it's like you're just throwing shit out there with no thought. And when you get challenged, you get very defensive and give very bad justifications. I'll respect different opinions, but I want them to be rational and based on facts.

 

What facts? Like release dates?

 

Or Google searches for others opinions? Or how you perceive a crowd is reacting?

 

I've never seen you present one "fact".

 

Really? Never? This confirms what I'm saying about how you address others' points.

 

What does it confirm? I'm not sure what exactly you percieve as "facts".

[bathory]

chillax

[bathory]

I don't even remember what the hell this tune sounds like. and what movie were yall talkin about?

[bathory]

alright, this thread's f*cked up.

 

savage is being a butthole because old people dont wanna watch new things.

 

but lots of folks I trust say city of god's a killer movie. I know, I know. it's not caddyshack, ghostbusters or fast times. but it's probably worth checking out

 

I don't think I've ever watched anything and thought "the editing sucks." if I like something, I like it, if I don't, I don't, and the way a movie is edited doesn't play into it.

 

different strokes I guess

[EagleMoon]

And stop projecting sh*t like I feel "threated" because you don't like what I like. Seriously, stuff like that is what pisses me off. You assuming that you know where I'm coming from and that "I feel threatened by the fact that I don't like the movie that you really like" is unbelievably simplistic and patronizing.

 

I was hoping we could have a conversation and was offering my views on that speific style of editing because I know how fast editing gets critized a lot (especially around here with the CA and Rio dvd's). No more, no more less. And then you respond with more inane patronizing bs about life being not "black and white" and me being "threatened".

 

Forgive me for assuming that you actually may have had something informative and worthwhile to say. My error.

 

Okay I wasn't going to say anything else but this post right here just shows how childish you can be. Touched a nerve? Obviously.

[Bigbobby10]

So. The Big Wheel

[savagegrace26]

And stop projecting sh*t like I feel "threated" because you don't like what I like. Seriously, stuff like that is what pisses me off. You assuming that you know where I'm coming from and that "I feel threatened by the fact that I don't like the movie that you really like" is unbelievably simplistic and patronizing.

 

I was hoping we could have a conversation and was offering my views on that speific style of editing because I know how fast editing gets critized a lot (especially around here with the CA and Rio dvd's). No more, no more less. And then you respond with more inane patronizing bs about life being not "black and white" and me being "threatened".

 

Forgive me for assuming that you actually may have had something informative and worthwhile to say. My error.

 

Okay I wasn't going to say anything else but this post right here just shows how childish you can be. Touched a nerve? Obviously.

 

I'm just being completely honest. If that's "childish" to you then whatever. I believe it's "chilidish" for you to assume shit about my motivations.

[Segue Myles]

One of the best poppy Rush songs IMO.

[losingit2k]

It's a good song but there are many other unplayed RUSH songs I like to hear first mainly:

 

Cut to the Chase

Open Secrets

Chain Lightning

Alien Shore

Available Light

Vapor Trails

Sweet Miracle

 

and:

 

Losing It

[EmotionDetector]

It's a song I remember really liking and listening to a lot back when I first got into RTB.

 

But over the years...I found myself skipping it quite often.

 

Still a good track...but like some others have eluded to...I'm not sure that it would translate well live...who knows?!

[EmotionDetector]

I dunno...personally, I've always enjoyed the one line quips "the song sucks", "this is sh*t!", etc.

 

They make me laugh...even when I completely disagree with them!

[Relayer2112]

I saw a list of superficial Rush songs. "The Big Wheel" would fit that category. Not a bad song, just kind of blah.

[Narps]

I saw a list of superficial Rush songs. "The Big Wheel" would fit that category. Not a bad song, just kind of blah.

You just joined today? Welcome to the TRF.... :cheers:

[greg2112]

Actually would like to hear The Big Wheel, one of my favorites off RTB. Hoping they lay off Power Windows next tour -- total overkill last time around. They shouldve went with more Signals tunes consider the 30th anniversary of the album and all. But they seem to love PoW, so there you go.

[len(songs)]

The Big Wheel - why did they ever consider putting this to tape?

[Mithrandir]

The Big Wheel - why did they ever consider putting this to tape?

 

Because it's a very good song!

[Digital Dad]

The Big Wheel - why did they ever consider putting this to tape?

 

RTB feels like the only album where they purposefully put filler on. This, FU (haha) and YBYL feel to me like they had nothing else in the tank. A shame cuz there are really great tunes here. I dont know what else they were trying to prove.

[Geddy's Soul Patch]

The Big Wheel - why did they ever consider putting this to tape?

 

RTB feels like the only album where they purposefully put filler on. This, FU (haha) and YBYL feel to me like they had nothing else in the tank. A shame cuz there are really great tunes here. I dont know what else they were trying to prove.

I don't think any songs on RTB sound like filler. They're all very interesting from a musical standpoint

[Irenicus]

Now, given current age and limitations, why they don't bring it out of the vault like Presto and other songs of the era

Because it sucks and the band is probably aware of that.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Irenicus

[micgtr71]

I really don't like this song or most of Roll the Bones. Ghost of a Chance seemed like it was trying to be two different songs, neither of which I liked. The Big Wheel and GOAC should remain tucked away on this record. Every ten years I give this LP a spin, the latest being this past summer. My least favorite collection of Rush songs.

[losingit2k]

I actually have it on my RUSH "Unplayed Live" playlist in my car. Its a pretty cool song that I think would sound fine live.