Jump to content

no part of it

Members
  • Posts

    188
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by no part of it

  1. 23 hours ago, J3FF3R00 said:

    Ugh. Why do they release this shit after I bought the wax trax 2x gold LP :facepalm:

    I am trying so hard to be happy with my original CD pressing!   It is hard!!!   I love the art...  but times are tight...  

    I also have that $70 poster in storage, still in plastic.   I think I bought it for $50 some years ago.  

    • Burger 1
  2. 15 minutes ago, Squee said:

    Haha, are you sure you don't want a celeb subforum?

    Gonna write about Lady Gaga tomorrow!  

    Honestly, I got to a point where I realized I'm giving a lot of free content to facebook, so I decided to write articles instead.  

    But I will follow this discussion whether people read the article or not.  I've actually grown to like some of Curry's music, and find him somewhat fascinating.  

  3. I may have found work from home, I start today, but I'm not positive it is not a scam of some sort.  If it's not a scam, it's still part time, but it would be an excellent job.  Seems too good to be true, but still looking for more work.  

    Don't have a degree, don't know excel, can't really do sales.  Wishing for more work from home options, like stuffing envelopes or something.  

    Apparently my wpm is only 70.  Can't seem to find transcription work that isn't for pennies.  Etc.  

  4. I have mixed feelings about Tim Curry continuing to make public appearances and also apparently a few roles here and there, after having suffered a stroke.  He's had a pretty colorful career, and I can't help but wonder if he is doing it for the love or the money.  

    One would hope he'd be able to live off of royalties or some other sort of retirement plan. 

    On the other hand, I do admire his courage, and I'm quite sure it's hard work for him to be as functional as he is.   I wrote a little article about it, if anyone is interested:

    https://vocal.media/geeks/tim-curry-s-time-warp-again

    • Thanks 1
    • Burger 1
  5. 1 minute ago, nikisoko said:

    hateful 8 borrowed a lot from  reservoir dogs, including plot points and the limited use of sets. reservoir dogs was on a limited budget but obviously just a stylistic choice in hateful 8.

    i think a lot of what tarantino focuses on is wondering what the dialog is between all these characters during down time between the action. sometimes that really clicks with people like in pulp fiction but i can understand how hateful 8 was harder to get through.

    i saw death proof in the theaters as part of the double feature. it was definitely an experience to go from planet terror, which was over the top, to death proof. a lot of people walked out.

    Yeah, not a huge fan of planet terror.

  6. 15 hours ago, hijexx said:

    Might be misremembering but I think he recently said he might do another movie then retire from directing or maybe Hollywood was his last movie, something like that.

     

    I recall him saying he will do a total of 10 movies, then maybe move on to focusing on writing.   

  7. 14 minutes ago, dingformung said:

    What's wrong with Death Proof?

    Nothing really, just that it was his most superficial film with less subtext and symbolism, and the fact that it was followed by two or three period-specific films made me assume it was going to be cheesy, plus Ennio Morricone said he was sloppy with the scores, so I didn't run to the theaters.   But I do love all of his films now.   I came back around for Hollywood, and caught up.   I loved ...Hollywood.  Laughed my ass off in the theaters.  

     

    • Like 1
  8. 1 hour ago, xox said:

    What gossip?

    His ties to Weinstein, his choice words about Polanski's rape victim in an interview with Howard Stern some years ago, his responsibility for Uma Thurman being injured during the filming of Kill Bill....  

  9. Surprised this forum didn't have more on him, especially with the relatively recent gossip.

    I personally have returned to his work, after ignoring him since Death Proof.  

    It was nothing personal, I just didn't think period pieces would fit him well, and I remember Ennio Morricone ripping on him, which was a big strike against him for me.   Morricone has backpedaled at times, but not all the time, as far as I can see.  

    Anyway, I wrote an article about him, and the hack VS. genius argument.    

    https://vocal.media/geeks/on-quentin-tarantino-s-legacy-and-the-shadow-it-casts

    • Like 1
  10. On 3/2/2021 at 7:07 AM, Nil said:

    I'm not sure we can compare music and series/movies here.
    I suppose everyone's involved in the making of a movie, TV show / series to be streamed via Netflix is paid, prior to streaming. Not sure there would be much content available otherwise.
    On the other hand, I suspect the vast majority of the artists on Spotify don't get a cent before streaming... and won't get much once their music is available. 

    FWIW, I wrote a bit of blather on this subject, with the final bit of impetus stemming from this thread.   Netflix is not being held accountable for the amount of streams they claim to have on any given film, much less an accurate royalties system.  They are trying to "buyout" rights to music from composers, rather than giving them royalties per stream.  The buyout situation tends to not even cover the costs of production.  

    https://vocal.media/beat/encountering-the-future-of-streaming-music-as-a-utility

    • Like 4
  11. 14 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

     

    haha you fell for the market competition meme

    I'm not sure what meme that is.  

    It just seems inevitable to me that bandcamp will get in on the streaming.  Anyone can, but I'm curious what Amazon, Spotify, etc do to prevent their competition from growing.  I've tried Beats Music because they pay their artists better, but they pandered to not only the mainstream, but also the college radio top 30 vibes, but not the underground in really any capacity.  I guess it is the underground's fault for not submitting their music, but I do think a better advertising campaign could fix that problem.   I'll look into the rest of it, thanks. 

  12. I'm not reading 15 pages here, but when this conversation comes up, I always point out that there have been attempts to raise the percentage paid to artists, and there have been lawsuits to stop it from going to 15% from 10 percent (I don't even think spotify pays 1%, but we are also talking Apple and Google, etc).   I think if enough people in power lawyer up, this will be attended to.   I'm not sure why these major labels are bending over, when they used to try everything they could to get a percentage of used CD sales and everything else.  Interscope started trying to sue people caught pirating mp3s in the 2000s, why don't the give streaming services a run for their money?   

    And why isn't there a platform that is really competing?   Beats Music could compete, but they don't seem to be interested in expanding their range.  Bandcamp could easily take over a big piece of this market, but they don't, they just charge their revenue share.  What about artists who don't want to sell downloads from their site?   There could easily be a "Bandcamp Plus" for streaming, with advertisements between songs for people who don't have a membership, instead of letting people stream for free, and taking a cut of their revenue.  Imagine if Spotify only took 15%?   Supposedly Spotfiy only began to make a profit in 2019, I'm pretty skeptical of that claim.  Spotify only needs to run their services, they do not need to invest in product.  They don't need to give people money up front.  If they failed to make a profit for 13 years, it is because they were started by rich people with capital who wanted tax breaks.  At least that's the way it looks to me.   

     

    "Just this week, Spotify sued music creators after a decision by the US Copyright Royalty Board required Spotify to increase its royalty payments. This isn't just wrong, it represents a real, meaningful and damaging step backwards for the music industry."

     

    https://ra.co/news/43455

     

    Along with Amazon, Google and Pandora, the streaming platform filed an appeal against a recent ruling by the Copyright Royalty Board that would increase songwriter royalties from on-demand streaming from 10.5 percent to 15.1 percent—a 44 percent increase—in the US over a five-year period. Spotify used a blog post to attempt to justify the move, which has been slammed by groups representing the interests of songwriters and publishers, especially the National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA). While Spotify claims to support a pay rise for songwriters, it goes on to assert that consumers will be "hurt" by an inability to bundle "music and non-music offerings," which it says are vital for "attracting first-time music subscribers so we can keep growing the revenue pie for everyone."

    https://ra.co/news/43428

     

     

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.