The Chatty Pointless Thread

[Ru1977]

I refuse to even touch a harmonica after my dad's Dylan phase.

 

[Chooch555]

Dylan had a pantsless phase?

 

[Ru1977]

He wishes. Honestly, I didn't even notice. THAT is how much I hate the harmonica.

 

[SDcomics]

"The answer my friend ... is blowin' in the wind ... the answer is blowin' in the wind ...."

 

[AceofKnaves]

I fucking love the harmonica.

I’m ambivalent towards Bob Dylan.

 

[TheSameIdiot]

But jeeeeeezus, Neo is one of my least-favorite lead movie characters of ALL TIME. Keanu was a horrible actor back then, and this role may well be his absolute worst.

I can't argue with that. Neo is a weak character. Reeves has always been a terrible actor. Point Break is the only performance of his I like, and even that's just a meme.

And anything cool in those movies isn’t even “real”. Maybe if I had an interest in video games I might feel differently, but when I watch those movies I just go “ughh this is all just made-up edgelord bullshit, they aren’t even wearing those clothes or carrying those guns, THEY DON’T EVEN REALLY KNOW KUNG FU, only their video game avatars can do all that stuff”.

You lost me. It's edgelord bullshit, but it's fucking sick edgelord bullshit. Those movies are stylish and smart. I'm a sucker for both in an action flick.

Oh!

But I did absolutely love The Matrix . . . when it was a movie called Dark City.

You're on thin ice.

Tha Matrix Trilogy is the litmus test to see if you believe a bad ending ruins the entire experience.

The movies go downhill (I'd rate them 5/5, 4/5, 3.5/5, respectively), but they tell a complete story. Crucially, The Matrix is one of the only franchises that doesn't just retell/remake the same story in every sequel. Back to the Future is great, but...

 

[Ru1977]

I fucking love the harmonica.

 

[AceofKnaves]

You lost me. It's edgelord bullshit, but it's fucking sick edgelord bullshit. Those movies are stylish and smart. I'm a sucker for both in an action flick.

I’ll go further:

The Matrix is fucking *boring*. And pretentious. And I even tend to *like* pretentious things. But holy shit, none of that edgelord bullshit, sick or otherwise, is even really happening! It’s a movie about people who are essentially playing a big video game. I simply cannot begin to get invested in the stakes. It’s all sound and fury, signifying many things but not actually *doing* anything.

And again, maybe I’d feel differently if I felt that video game vibe. But I have never wanted to be a character in a video game. Like the trenchcoats don’t even exist. They are virtual trenchcoats.

 

[Ru1977]

I'm okay with Matrix, but I loved Cloud Atlas.

 

[joshsquash729]

The Matrix is good, I think, when viewed as a product of its time. It was groundbreaking in so many ways and perhaps influential in even more. By today's standards, it may not be the absolute strongest movie, but by 1999 standards? There was nothing like it. I saw it as a kid, so my view of movies was still forming, so I may not have the same view as many others, but even I remember how groundbreaking it felt. That first one holds up decently well- it gives you just enough of the world and its characters and lore to be interesting and leaves the rest up to you in a way. I wouldn't say anyone in the movie- except maybe Mouse and Joey Pants- are particularly all that charismatic, so I can forgive Keanu's dryness (he's certainly not my favorite actor, but I think he's as beloved as he is because he seems, by all accounts, to be a great guy. His style definitely works better for comedy, intentional or not).

The sequels get a little in too deep with the lore and the cheese and everything, but they're guilty pleasure movies. I don't necessarily think they're anywhere near as bad as a lot of other people say, they're just almost a totally different genre than the first in a way. I view them sort of like I view the Pirates sequels (though, admittedly, I love the Pirates movies more)- the first is sort of its own well crafted, self-contained thing that was only meant to be that, and the sequels feel like they were made after the fact and because they had to be. They're still better than a ton of other generic action movies out there- at least they have their own feel and style.

Bonus points to the first one for essentially being a big trans allegory too. Doesn't happen often, but I've seen a couple toxic film bros have meltdowns over the years when they discover one of their favorite edgelord movies is, at least partially, based on the filmmakers' secret trans identities at the time.

 

[AceofKnaves]

saw it as a kid

See, that may be a thing:
I was 21 years old in 1999, and already had really strong opinions about what I wanted and didn’t want in movies, and was really only 5 years past my awakening that “big action movie” does not mean “good movie that I will like” (thank Independence Day for that, it was a revelation in how shitty a “big movie” can be). So I was still feeling, like, actively betrayed when a movie that looked like it was going to be “for me” wound up aggressively not pleasing me. In only a few short months, I’d watch Raimi’s Spider-man in abject despair at how not-what-I-hoped-for it was.

Bonus points to the first one for essentially being a big trans allegory too

Sigh. I definitely missed the allegory when I watched it, and honestly I have a lot of guilt at how much I completely despise The Matrix specifically because I know now about the sub-content and kinda wish I could like the film.

 

[AceofKnaves]

They're still better than a ton of other generic action movies out there- at least they have their own feel and style.

That is probably true.
This film also helped me realize that I honesty don’t really like action movies. Or I kinda do? But they need to have specific things and also NOT have specific things. But mostly I don’t like action movies.

 

[Damien]

I do fight direction, which is using stage movement to tell a story. There are also dance choreographers, who also use stage movement to tell a story.
Both are valid and necessary.
But fight choreography is not dance choreography.
And dance choreography is not fight choreography.

But they are both choreography. And if someone said that fight choreography isn't choreography because it doesn't conform to -dance- choreography, you'd rightly believe that their position is coming from a strange place of prejudice against fight choreography, not from a place of genuine understanding and fact.

And some folks may just be like “well, I’ll watch choreographed fights all day long, but I have no interest in dance”. And some folks may be like “well I enjoy dance, but I absolutely do not want to see any kind of staged violence, no matter how talented the performers/creators.”

Yeah. Like some people will listen to a metal vocalist and some people will listen to a country vocalist. They can like one and not the other while understanding both vocalists are -singing-.

I’m guessing the feedback you have gotten has been “that’s not singing because it is *lesser* than singing”. I say “that’s not singing because it is a *different* method of using vocal performance to tell a story, just like rap, beat poetry, etc are also not singing but rather different methods of using vocal performance to tell a story.” Not less than (even if I don’t personally like it), just different.

I understand what you're saying. I just think you're dead wrong and it makes no sense.
This is the same argument as shitty, often no-name theatre actors that say movie acting isn't REAL acting and voice acting isn't REAL acting. Only the STAAAAAAAAAAGE is real acting, darlings. It's the same argument I've heard for years that punk music isn't -real- music, or electronic music isn't -real- music. It's always... something else.

Aaaaaaaand, as someone who has studied singing *and also* other forms of vocal production/performance very seriously all my life, it is hard to hear “all vocal performance associated with music is singing”

I never said all vocal performance is singing. But singing songs is singing. Just because you have some very clear bias against a certain -type- of singing doesn't make it not singing. And in all my years in various music communities, including speaking with vocal coaches and professionally trained singers, I've literally never heard a single other person "in the know" say that metal singers aren't singers.
In fact, the only people that have ever said that were the least educated, bigoted dipshits that only listen to country music and performatively cover their ears when they hear metal while shouting "eeww.. what is that noise! that's not even singing!"

It's a bad faith argument, in any case. No matter how you try to justify it. And honestly, coming from someone like you, I find the entire position you're taking to be kind of shocking. I'm sure I won't convince you that you're dead wrong - but you are. And I say that only with love because you and TSI are my forever dudes and I love you even if I disgaree wildly with the things you say (like TSI and his ridiculously positive outlook on life that makes me want to cut myself).

 

[joshsquash729]

Agreed with all your points, Ace. It takes a while for any of us to realize what we like out of a movie, especially the big blockbusters. Having been born in the 90's, I tend to like almost anything from that time, regardless of how "radical and cool and edgy" it was trying to be for the time. I'm sure it definitely blew young minds like mine, and also allowed folks who weren't particularly edgy or cool to feel edgy and cool. The nerds kinda took it over as they're wont to do.

But there's certainly plenty in it that's made for a very specific crowd. Aside from all the techno-jargon, there's the clear Eastern influence with the fighting styles, there's the super cool black-leather stuff, post apocalyptic, etc. all jumbled up into one. I'm not one for a whole lot of kung-fu movies, so if it had stuck with just that and not layered anything on top of it, I'm not sure I'd be as into it.

And don't feel bad for not picking up on the allegory. I don't think anyone, except maybe other trans folk, would have back then. Only reason I ever did was because the Wachowskis just outright said it. Would've been interesting to see the character Switch if their original plans had been able to happen- switching genders whenever entering the Matrix.


Regarding the other talk- what is/isn't singing/choreography, it's an interesting discussion I've never really thought of, despite being quite artsy myself. I think ultimately it comes down to semantics; "singing" is an umbrella term that, like art itself, is so subjective. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of heavy metal or the more heavy genres, but I like plenty of old punk and grunge and other things that people would sooner consider nails on a chalkboard than "music". I can't deny that many singers- of all genres, to be fair- can train their voice to sing properly, however their style. Many can train to do heavy metal in a way that's healthy on the voice. Many can not train to do rock or pop and completely fuck up or change their voice- look at Steven Tyler, for instance. Alex Brightman, who played Beetlejuice in the Broadway musical, trained to sing in a very gravelly, rough tone, but did so in a way that wouldn't fuck up his voice otherwise. Not exactly metal, but similar styles.

You could argue, in a weird way, that it comes down to what you put into it, like any art form. The difference between "a singer" and "someone who sings" is often hair-thin. I wouldn't personally consider Bob Dylan to be a singer, but I can't deny his artistry. Or folks like, say, T-Pain, who go heavy on the autotune, despite actually being able to sing really well, as almost an artistic flair in and of itself. I wouldn't consider a lot of country singers- particularly the men- to be singers. To me, they all sound the same, and most sit in the same nasal register in their voice they never venture outside of. To others, they're beautiful singers.

I think it ultimately comes down to "if you say it is, then it is", and vice versa. If it speaks to you, it's art. If not, it's noise.

 

[AceofKnaves]

But they are both choreography.

Right. And both singing and whatever we want to call what Dani Filth is doing are under the banner of “vocal production”, the macro-category which includes singing, and which also includes speaking, rapping, vocal percussion, etc. It’s a diverse family, related by the fact that the voice is being used to produce the performance.

This is the same argument as shitty, often no-name theatre actors that say movie acting isn't REAL acting and voice acting isn't REAL acting. Only the STAAAAAAAAAAGE is real acting, darlings. It's the same argument I've heard for years that punk music isn't -real- music, or electronic music isn't -real- music. It's always... something else.

Definitely, DEFINITELY not the argument I am making. At all.

I've literally never heard a single other person "in the know" say that metal singers aren't singers.

OK but I am not saying that. Lots of metal has singing. Some doesn’t. Hell I love metal, I’m listening to it right now. Many of my favorite “popular music” singers are in the metal macrogenre. I’m really speaking specifically about a few types of vocal production that are used, not even the specific genre they are being used in. And truly, I am not speaking in the pejorative, at least respective to the talent and artistry. It’s aggressively not for me, but that doesn’t mean it’s objectively “bad”.

In fact, the only people that have ever said that were the least educated, bigoted dipshits that only listen to country music and performatively cover their ears when they hear metal while shouting "eeww.. what is that noise! that's not even singing!"

Lol country music is my second-least favorite genre of music, right above numetal.

It's a bad faith argument, in any case

Mmmm that’s not true. It’s an argument you disagree with, and fair enough, but I assure you no bad faith is present. Indeed, it’s in the best possible faith I can muster, but it *is* informed by my two advanced degrees in performance (specializing in vocal production, natch), over a decade of private vocal instruction as a young adult, and also fronting two rock bands. Which is all just what it is, I’m definitely not reaching for clout here, but I’m also not pulling this out of my ass or out of pique over a genre I dislike.

And honestly, coming from someone like you, I find the entire position you're taking to be kind of shocking.

Seriously: I really am not condemning all metal vocal performance here. I’m not even condemning the vocal performance I don’t like. And trust, just because someone is singing doesn’t mean they are singing *well*.

And I say that only with love

I totally get that, and I respect and love you
and your passion on this issue, and I actually don’t think we are as divided on this as it appears.

I mean, I get it: I’ve heard the “horror movies aren’t real, legit movies” constantly, as well as “oh sure that movie is GOOD but it’s not *actually* horror, and if it was horror it wouldn’t be good”. And I’ve been plenty salty about that.
But please trust: that is not the kind of argument I am trying to make here. The opposite, really: I would contend that Dani Filth-style vocal production is its own specific set of skills and its own unique art form under the umbrella of vocal production, worthy of respect as its own special thing.