Watching Movies Alone with crumbsroom

Tools    





Dude this has happened to me so much and it kills me. And like you say, people act like I'm crazy.
For example, I took a video of Lucius' Tiny Desk concert and ran it through Garage Band, breaking it up into individual tracks, and then put it back into iTunes as a sort of mini-album and it was one of my favorite things to listen to as they are my favorite versions of the songs.
And then iTunes updated and replaced each song with the album-version that iTunes carries. And I had already deleted the GarageBand file. So I either have to do it all over again or just let it go.
Furious.
I'm glad that I never used iTunes, and by the time I might have, I already had a couple of friends tell me similar things. I'm just kind of obsessive about backing my files up, and the thought of anything original sitting on someone else's server, like Apple, just never made sense to me.


I'm not sure what it's called, but my brother uses a local streaming thing, some device that allows him to stream his whole music catalogue, from his own hard drive, to any other receiving device in his house. It's a nice set-up, but I don't have a lot of money for those kinds of fancy rigs. I guess what I mean is that it doesn't seem like even the convenience of streaming is something that you need to depend on a subscription service for, but it would require having local copies of your music on a drive in your home.



Yeah, I hoped it was clear that I was wildly generalizing based on the youngsters that I'm acquainted with and their habits. One example is my friend's son, who has recently taken up bass guitar but literally does not have a "music collection" of any kind. Everything he likes is available online so the closest he comes to owning anything is various Spotify playlists. So in the event that he decides to pursue a music career, I wonder what kind of perspective he'll have.

And I want to clarify that my post wasn't an old guy grumbling about Gen Z, if that's how it came across. In previous years we've had old dudes like Lars saying "we used to get paid for stuff but now we aren't". So I'm interested in how things will develop now that the incoming musicians have never known the model Lars is accustomed to. (Again, generally speaking.)
Oh, I know you well enough you aren't some grumpy old fart at all (nor did your post give that impression in any way) and I think your concerns are legitimate, I just wanted to counter it with that I still see a lot of young people willing to pay for music, either through the previously mentioned Bandcamp and Patreon or just the classic going to live shows, even though I know it is still a widely spread problem. I guess I just don't see it as a purely Generation Z thing, in the sense that we weren't the ones who founded this new model, and that I see a lot of older generations embrace it eagerly as well (sadly enough). A lot of people see art of various kinds nowadays as something they either get for free or something they are only willing to buy in bulk (see Netflix and Spotify).


It remains the big problem in my media consumation in that a) I believe artists should be paid and b) art is something that should be accessible/affordable, an already tricky thing only further complicated by major corporations hoarding the revenues and limiting availability. Which I guess explains my ambition to get a library science degree and actively work within that sector.


Either way, sorry for the rant Crumb, I will now retreat to my fortress of solitude again.



JJ, who was the dum-dum who called you a hoarder on RT?
It was an OT person, maybe the one called 'L7' (with a Tim Robbins av) or maybe the really obnoxious guy with the Fresh Prince av whose name I don't remember. Both of them seemed like marketing department types who loved to say disparaging things about anyone expressing a passion towards art that wasn't explicitly commerical in nature. (It definitely wasn't YARN though, despite our other disagreements on the subject.)



Oh, I know you well enough you aren't some grumpy old fart
But....I have a Napster subscription....

I guess I just don't see it as a purely Generation Z thing, in the sense that we weren't the ones who founded this new model, and that I see a lot of older generations embrace it eagerly as well
Oh yeah, definitely. The problem isn't that "kids today" don't want to pay for anything, it's that they don't have to. If I could've streamed free Kiss songs on demand in 1978 I would've 100% done it. (much to the chagrin of Gene Simmons, I'm sure) And out of my circle of Gen X friends who are serious music fans (musicians, even) only one of them still actively collects physical media.
__________________
Captain's Log
My Collection



It was an OT person, maybe the one called 'L7' (with a Tim Robbins av) or maybe the really obnoxious guy with the Fresh Prince av whose name I don't remember. Both of them seemed like marketing department types who loved to say disparaging things about anyone expressing a passion towards art that wasn't explicitly commerical in nature. (It definitely wasn't YARN though, despite our other disagreements on the subject.)
Vaguely remember the former, think I remember the latter's avatar but not much else.*Was hoping to reminisce over some dead forum drama, haha.



Why did it strike you as immature and try hard? I see the meta reading there but it struck me as Trier grappling with the inability to ever effectively punish the truly wicked and that their acts essentially take on a form of artistry in and of themselves. The “negative” of failing upward seems an integral piece to the fabric of the film.

I found it as involving, affective, thoughtful and self loathing as anything Trier makes. I admire his fearlessness in plunging head on into material that many would deride as being too extreme or too pretentious. I think he earns the territory with artistry and a type of cynical authenticity.

I mean, the flick starts with a protracted conversation about a “broken Jack.” His sardonic sense of humor is fully in place. What’s not to love?

Von Trier so frequently balances on the extremely thin line between interesting provocation and cynical manipulation, real thoughtfulness and pointlessly punching holes in walls, pure emotions and likely trolling, deliberate pretentiousness and not so deliberate pretentiousness, that it can be hard to explain why one film of his works for me and another one feels like a big put on.



I think what it amounts to is that beneath all of the belligerence on the surface of his films, that you can find small details that add a depth to the experience. For me The Antichrist isn't defined by dick cutting as much as it is the sound of acorns rolling down a roof. Melancholia less about the Apocalypse, and more about a bride late for her wedding and stuck in a limousine. Dancer in the Dark, not simply emotional torture porn, but an eliptically edited document of life lived in this small town. These smaller moments allow me to believe in his more ridiculous and baroque and overtly malicious ones. It provides a balance, sort of like the joy of filmmaking you can sense in John Waters earlier efforts make his carnival barker tactics to get people in seats seems less about simple attention seeking, and more about a camaraderie between outcasts.



The House that Jack Built doesn't lend me any moments of poetry, or any slyly observed human behavior, and certainly none of that joy of filmmaking. It seems a movie made by a man who is too tired to really give his rage and depth, and is just presenting a dried up husk of a thesis regarding good and evil, the dubious nature of artists like him. I just found it really sad (in a not good way) along with frustrating and kind of empty. I do think there were some occassional moments of black humor that kinda worked, but it wasn't enough. Like I said, I still like watching what he does, even when what he does isn't working for me. I can't say I wasn't intrigued by Jack. And there was even a moment



SPOILERS where he begins to talk about how he's never managed to build his house, he's obviously been too busy distracted by his 'art', and in that moment I could see something genuinely sad being sad by Von Trier, maybe taking stock of his own life. But then when it became 'you just have to use the material you have at hand, build a house with that', what happens was just so painfully on the nose, and stupidly juvenile, it undid that moment of emotional clarity and became....dopeyEND OF SPOILERS


I'm sure, as you have done, you can piece together his little dirge of a jigsaw puzzle and make a conclusion of what it is saying. I don't think he made the movie for no reason beyond offending people. He's a more interesting artist than that, even at the worst of times. But it doesn't mean that pieces being put together are of much interest to me on their own. They don't carry any weight. There really wasn't even enough power in them to offend me. I really can't see it as being anything but one of his worst films.



Victim of The Night
On the topic of physical media, I have both.
I have 500-600 vinyl records, which I do use.
I technically have at least as many or maybe 1000 CDs... which I don't.
I have a library on my computer or cloud of digital music that's about 12,000 tracks strong and climbing all the time and a I have a digital to analog converter (DAC) which makes every one of those tracks sound, to my ears, better than a CD.
So I use a hybrid model in which, when I want to listen to an album I go pull it off the shelf, set it on the platter and lay a needle to it, but when I want to hear songs or a mix thereof, I just run them from my laptop through the DAC and I'm happy as a clam.
This affords me a good reason to have something like Apple Music which I can use as both a Music Library and a way to stream as well as a constant source of new music.



IN case of physical media I have about 2000 records (and it is a rock solid 2000 records) after having to get rid of about another 2000 due to space issues.



I used to have probably about 500 or so CD's but they went in the trash when I got bedbugs a few years ago, and I had the privilege of seeing some homeless guy selling them on a blanket a few days later.



I've never downloaded a song. And usually only listen to music on YouTube when I don't have access to my record player. As a result, I know very little music outside of what I actually own.



Vaguely remember the former, think I remember the latter's avatar but not much else.*Was hoping to reminisce over some dead forum drama, haha.
Pretty sure it was L7, in either a vinyl thread or a music thread where vinyl was being discussed, and this guy has to be that guy and come in with "Lol, look at you guys with all your stuff!" And obnoxiously pointing out, "I have every song I could possibly want to hear streaming from anywhere with just the push of a button on my pheewwn." The kind of guy who gets insecure around people who don't share his addition to technological relevance. I asked something about the quality of the streaming, and he said something about the music is "master quality". I said, "Master? Like the original masters? The magnetic tape from the studio?" "Yeah, it's the same quality as the masters." At that point it was clear he had no clue what he was talking about.



I asked something about the quality of the streaming, and he said something about the music is "master quality". I said, "Master? Like the original masters? The magnetic tape from the studio?" "Yeah, it's the same quality as the masters." At that point it was clear he had no clue what he was talking about.
I guess he means this thing called Master Quality Authenticated, related to Tidal (probably the service he was referring to), but MQA isn't lossless, and anyway there's never been a 100% faithful reproduction of master tapes. That's why they're called "masters".


I do still have a bunch of CDs, many are more nostalgic value or ones I've burned myself over the years. Oh, and the box sets, which make nice packages in themselves. I haven't bought a new CD in.....since, um....maybe the Beatles' Love?



Victim of The Night
IN case of physical media I have about 2000 records (and it is a rock solid 2000 records) after having to get rid of about another 2000 due to space issues.



I used to have probably about 500 or so CD's but they went in the trash when I got bedbugs a few years ago, and I had the privilege of seeing some homeless guy selling them on a blanket a few days later.



I've never downloaded a song. And usually only listen to music on YouTube when I don't have access to my record player. As a result, I know very little music outside of what I actually own.
This is what I love about digital. I get fed new music constantly and get to decide what I like and keep it if I want. Khruangbin is a good example of a band I discovered digitally (recommends by the digital algorithms) but now have their albums on vinyl. Black Pumas is another.



Victim of The Night
Pretty sure it was L7, in either a vinyl thread or a music thread where vinyl was being discussed, and this guy has to be that guy and come in with "Lol, look at you guys with all your stuff!" And obnoxiously pointing out, "I have every song I could possibly want to hear streaming from anywhere with just the push of a button on my pheewwn." The kind of guy who gets insecure around people who don't share his addition to technological relevance. I asked something about the quality of the streaming, and he said something about the music is "master quality". I said, "Master? Like the original masters? The magnetic tape from the studio?" "Yeah, it's the same quality as the masters." At that point it was clear he had no clue what he was talking about.



This is what I love about digital. I get fed new music constantly and get to decide what I like and keep it if I want. Khruangbin is a good example of a band I discovered digitally (recommends by the digital algorithms) but now have their albums on vinyl. Black Pumas is another.

While it would make sense for me to do this, as it would get even more music into my earholes, the only way I can compell myself to buy records if I have no idea what I'm getting into, and have to face the possibility I hate it after spending anywhere between 20 and a hundred dollars for it.


Good thing I'm a genius at blind buying. I can maybe name five records I regret purchasing in the last decade, and I wouldn't be surprised if I gave them another chance, they aren't so bad after all.


Also helps that I like an ungodly amount of different music styles.






Ovidio Assonitis (director of Beyond the Door, producer of The Visitor) strikes again. Probably one of the best purveyor of cheap knock offs, the weirdness in these movies is so visceral, the dude needs some kind of retrospective. His films probably don't really qualify as so bad they are good, and they are definitely not good on face value, so they are probably a hard sell to most. But for films that in many ways don't have an original bone in their body, they are some how unique and engaging, and have the same confounding and oblique narrative strategy so gainfully employed by guys like Fulci (who approaches story as something one recites between epileptic fits) .



Clearly I need to get around to his cheap knock off of Jaws (Tentacles) because I need to see what he can do with Henry Fonda in the eight loving arms of a rabid octopus (my hope is it will be more of a knock off of On Golden Pond, where the octopus has issues of parental neglect, and only wants Henry to teach it how to properly execute a dive...or else)



Also, if anyone can possibly find a link to the rare experimental film The Experiencer (1977), or has any way to track it down, you'll be my hero.



cheap knock off of Jaws
You must have already seen The Last Shark (Great White) which happens to feature Vic Morrow involved in a deadly helicopter accident. Weird, huh?



Billie Eilish? She's ok. Not to hype her new album, but I like her Radiohead influence.


Isn't it weird how she got called out a few weeks back because video of her lipping along with a Tyler The Creator song about drugging women until they look Chinese made the woke-alert rounds because omg she almost said 'chink'? I think she was 13 at the time? You know what I didn't see? I didn't see one person come out and say that maybe Tyler The Creator is kind of a bastard for doing a song about slipping drugs in drinks to make women look like chinks. That song apparently came out in 2011. We too stupid to remember that far back? But then Tyler The Creator, literally a week after Eilish's controversy, came out with a new #1 song? And nobody said nothing? Is this like a Gangster Disciple thing where we're not supposed to act like we know? Did Eilish not pay her protection check this month? Should this post be in the Conspiracy Theory thread? I'm as confused as you.