The Big Wheel - why?

[savagegrace26]

It gets a pretty good response from the crowd at the end here:

 

http://youtu.be/V44nMspPhu4?t=6m13s

 

All you can hear is the guy who's filming it hoarsely croaking Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuuuuuhhhh.

 

Really? That's not all I hear. You can hear the entire crowd at the very end. Listen again @6:25.

 

It's a very enthusiastic response.

I watched as much as I could and got seasick if that helps any.......

 

Seasick? From that? What's wrong with you?

Edited October 8, 2014 by savagegrace26

[savagegrace26]

I don't suggest that you ever watch The Bourne Ultimatum, Snatch, or Domino. Or Natural Born Killers. Or Man on Fire. Edited October 8, 2014 by savagegrace26

[Narps]

It gets a pretty good response from the crowd at the end here:

 

http://youtu.be/V44nMspPhu4?t=6m13s

 

All you can hear is the guy who's filming it hoarsely croaking Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuuuuuhhhh.

 

Really? That's not all I hear. You can hear the entire crowd at the very end. Listen again @6:25.

 

It's a very enthusiastic response.

I watched as much as I could and got seasick if that helps any.......

 

Seasick? From that? What's wrong with you?

The camera jumping all over the place possibly.....

[Narps]

I don't suggest that you ever watch The Bourne Ultimatum, Snatch, or Domino. Or Natural Born Killers. Or Man on Fire.

Or Hurt Locker. My wife and I had to leave about 20 minutes in.....

[savagegrace26]

And definitely not City of God. Excellent excellent excellent movie but hyper hyper kinetic.

 

Go ahead. i dare you...

 

[Narps]

And definitely not City of God. Excellent excellent excellent movie but hyper hyper kinetic.

 

Go ahead. i dare you...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd68fZq_af4

[EagleMoon]

And definitely not City of God. Excellent excellent excellent movie but hyper hyper kinetic.

 

Go ahead. i dare you...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd68fZq_af4

 

That was gross, and the editing sucked too.

[savagegrace26]

And definitely not City of God. Excellent excellent excellent movie but hyper hyper kinetic.

 

Go ahead. i dare you...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd68fZq_af4

 

That was gross, and the editing sucked too.

 

It's an excellent movie. Very powerful storytelling. That's just the beginning. But yes, some of the editing is too much. Good thing the entire movie isn't like that constantly but it is very stylized.

[savagegrace26]

It was hard to get into the movie initially because of that overdone editing but once the story and characters start you get sucked in. It's a harrowing hard hitting story so I understand why they started it that way. They are emphazing disorder and confusion. They wanted the viewer to be uncomfortable. The style serves the material. Edited October 8, 2014 by savagegrace26

[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.

[EagleMoon]

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.

[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.

[EagleMoon]

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.

[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.

Edited October 8, 2014 by savagegrace26

[LedRush]

And Territories hasn't been played in concert in over 25 years. Why would it get an "oh i remember that song" like Bravado, a song thats pretty much overplayed. How many casual Rush fans do you think listen to Power Windows often if at all?

 

I don't recall Mystic Rhythms getting a great response on the R30 tour either....does that qualify it as a shit song too?

 

Yes.

[LedRush]

It gets a pretty good response from the crowd at the end here:

 

http://youtu.be/V44nMspPhu4?t=6m13s

 

That's a joke, right?

[LedRush]

The bridge is pretty cool, but as far as live songs go, this one is probably near the bottom of their list to dig out for a live performance. I think they like playing obscure songs that are at least relatively popular amongst the fanbase (like Presto or Circumstances) or songs that were once live staples (Marathon, Territories, TIme Stand Still).

 

We've gotten all of those recently (and Territories was abysmal on the last tour...you could see the audience disengaging almost immediately as they realized they were getting yet another song they didn't know or didn't like).

 

You can't judge it based on that because a lot of songs will get that kind of reaction if they're not the well known "hits". Has nothing to do with the quality of the song, people just generally prefer the familiar.

 

I was straight up giddy with Territories. I thought the included video was perfect. It was a socio political statement.... just as the song is. Those who run to the restroom or the beer line during that song don't get the song... which, frankly, is fine by me. Something tells me "Joe Six Pack" is more a Kiss guy than a Rush guy anyway.

 

The problem isn't the message...it's just a boring song with bad melodies, weak lyrics, and boring instrumentation.

 

"and the 3rd in a row that virtually no one likes"

 

Virtually no one likes? What? That's hardly true. Don't state something as factual that isn't and don't speak for others. I already did a poll about this song and the vast majority "liked" it.

 

And it's an extremely interesting song, with good melodies, excellent lyrics, and fantastic instrumentation. I love the rhythm and drumming on this one. The lyrics are some of the best on Power Windows (which is one of Neil's most accomplshed set of lyrics). Second best song on Power Windows after Marathon.

 

A majority of the extremely hardcore fans in a forum devoted to the band who actually bothered to answer your poll like the song, meaning that your poll means absolutely nothing regarding a concert of with 12,000 people in attendance. In the 6 times I saw the band on this tour, each time the audience was completely checked out by the time this song played. It was night and day in comparison to the reaction of the new material. Some of this is undoubtedly due to the style of the songs, but some is also due to the quality.

 

The crowd had heard four of those similar feeling 80's songs in a row at that point. I think that it has more to with that and also that Territories has a slower tempo. It has more to do with setlist choice the song itself (assuming your observations are even accurate and you're not projecting your own feelings). You can blame the setlist order just as much as the song so nothing is conclusive. Maybe the crowd were just ready for a "hit" at that point. or just something that "rocks" more, which they got with the next song.

You put that song in between Tom Sawyer, The Spirit of Radio, Freewill and Working Man and the audience will still disengage.

 

You can insert Middletown Dreams, The Body Electric, Bravado, Red Sector A, etc and say the same thing. Especially with three consecutive classics like that.

 

I think you're really just projecting how you personally react to the song onto others.

I don't like Middletown Dreams at all, and you could see that the crowd reaction was much better to this song (mostly among those close to the stage and a few hardcore sprinkled throughout). People were obviously more mellow than on an upbeat song, but people were somewhat engaged with it. The Body Electric didn't get a huge reaction, but people moved to the song, imitating the drums and bass. Bravado at least got an "oh, I remember that song" kinda acknowledgment. Territories got none of that.

 

Territories was played after Middletown Dreams/The Body Electric. Could just be a simple case of enough is enough at that point - "give me something that rocks or a song I know". And of course you'e mostly referring to the people in close proximity to you. I hope you're not trying to analyze reactions from a crowd of thousands.

 

Sure. It is quite difficult to tell when people stand up or sit down, or cheer or don't, or dance or don't. I mean, that's darn near impossible, right?

[savagegrace26]

And Territories hasn't been played in concert in over 25 years. Why would it get an "oh i remember that song" like Bravado, a song thats pretty much overplayed. How many casual Rush fans do you think listen to Power Windows often if at all?

 

I don't recall Mystic Rhythms getting a great response on the R30 tour either....does that qualify it as a shit song too?

 

Yes.

 

So anything that an audience doesn't respond to with wild unbridled lust and adoration automatically makes it a "shit song"?

 

Have you ever thought for yourself?

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.

 

 

Wow, thank goodness that Savage is once again here to tell us that someone else's subjective opinion is wrong, and to appeal to authority, like a calendar, to prove it.

[LedRush]

And Territories hasn't been played in concert in over 25 years. Why would it get an "oh i remember that song" like Bravado, a song thats pretty much overplayed. How many casual Rush fans do you think listen to Power Windows often if at all?

 

I don't recall Mystic Rhythms getting a great response on the R30 tour either....does that qualify it as a shit song too?

 

Yes.

 

So anything that an audience doesn't respond to with wild unbridled lust and adoration automatically makes it a "shit song"?

 

Have you ever thought for yourself?

 

Have you ever properly represented someone else's opinion?

[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.

 

 

Wow, thank goodness that Savage is once again here to tell us that someone else's subjective opinion is wrong, and to appeal to authority, like a calendar, to prove it.

 

As opposed to appealing to a consensus of Google searched opinions?

 

Context and intention is important when evaluating an artistic work. Just dismissing something with an "it sucks" comment without knowing or understand the framework is deragatory and shallow.

 

Unless the subject in question is the Dave Matthews Band....

[EagleMoon]

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.

[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.

[EagleMoon]

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.

 

This entire conversation is a joke because you refuse to listen to anything that I'm actually saying. You're reading your own slant into it so no matter what I say you can't hear me. You feel threatened by the fact that I don't like the movie that you really like. Get over yourself. If you want other people to put some thought into what they say, do the same yourself and quit arguing with everything they say. Okay, moving on.

Edited October 8, 2014 by EagleMoon

[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.

 

You feel threatened by the fact that I don't like the movie that you really like.

 

I don't f*cking care if you like it or not. You get over yourself. You responded with an "it sucks" which was an ignorant and blatantly thoughtless thing to say. The truth is that you sounded dumb and shallow and I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and a chance to actually say something intelligent. I don't care if you like the movie or the editing, your response was just immediately dismissive. Me actually offering an insight on the possible motives for that editing style does not mean I want you to like the movie or that I care if you do. I didn't even say anything negative toward you and again got dismissive and defensive. You didn't even watch the stupid movie, why the hell would I care about that? Your opinion is not that important.