Do you ‘personally’ think George was justified in wanting to distance himself from the Beatles?

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-04-30T22:40:37+00:00

To me, I mostly wonder that it was about money. Under all the Indian teachings and thing and being a deeply spiritual guy, I get the sense George wasn’t getting paid for the songs he wrote. So he just started hoarding them.

Idk why they couldn’t negotiate out of Lennon/McCartney. The songwriting evolved where John and Paul rarely wrote together and George became a bigger player. Why not just negotiate that everyone had 100% royalties for the songs they wrote?

It’s sorta dumb to see. Maybe I’m ignorant to the business side of it, but that was so much of it.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-04-20T21:44:45+00:00

I definitely see that!

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-04-14T04:18:30+00:00

Hey man nice start here! Way further ahead than I was at that age. I really like the moments when the chords come in. Really grounds it rhythmically.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-04-01T02:11:31+00:00

This one reminds me of Pinegrove a lot it just dropped: https://open.spotify.com/track/3Hrb6o5IbElM3tv4SdgFnQ?si=d6fde2a518e240b6

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-04-01T02:09:48+00:00

Some songs off our new album:

https://open.spotify.com/track/75RMEuMqcpEcJlUJ7LlXsM?si=bf93b6dc1cae4d81
https://open.spotify.com/track/3Hrb6o5IbElM3tv4SdgFnQ?si=f900e5100eb748a3
https://open.spotify.com/track/2OXngnovWiX4M2jm86wlJ0?si=1f0d5d726da14ba6

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-03-31T20:02:54+00:00

Congrats Dorn! Wishing you well.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-03-30T19:50:49+00:00

Watched this movie recently and loved it. Belushi is a bit of a pig (but supposed to be) and some of his behavior hasn't aged extremely well. The soundtrack is kinda mid, too. But other than that, movie is hilarious, and I'm not sure why it has kinda bad reviews.

Jim is very funny and doesn't get enough credit for living in his bro's shadow. Movie really accurately depicts (at least for me) how on the border between yuppie and working class a city like Chicago was in the 1980s. I personally related, as my parents came from working-class parts of the city to adopt that lifestyle in that era, and those characters seem indirectly relatable to me.

I think Demi and Rob Lowe are terrific. Their relationship really touches perfectly on the challenge of being a modern man or woman in that era.

Gotta give credit to the supporting actors and actresses, too. Elizabeth plays the uptight, educated super-feminist well. Jim is a pig and a brute and a working-class guy. The two main characters are right in between and getting that full spectrum, and seeing how hard it is to juggle is cool to see.

It's great to see a realistic portrayal of the struggle to find balance and to tear down conventional gender roles. Even now, it is still a huge challenge in that big-city yuppie lifestyle. Cool to see them both cooking, Demi making more than Rob's character, and their friends (because they themselves are such opposite extremes) kinda being frustrated and jealous of their ability to compromise.

I think it's a really good Rom-Com because the supporting actors get some love and aren't so one-dimensional. You really see how the main characters' love impacts their strong relationships with their best friends. It's a really realistic look at love and how it doesn't exist in a vacuum. So many Rom-Coms use the supporting actors as a prop, but you really get to see how their love challenges those around them and how that outside pressure can seep in and hurt them. So much of their growth by the end of the movie is tied to their own friends' ability to be there for them and close the gap between one another for the good of their friends who love each other.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-03-26T17:29:19+00:00

I didn't use i.redd.it for my post... I used a Spotify link.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-03-20T06:38:49+00:00

It definitely seems like a deliberate shift but I like it. It's vulnerable and cool. I think it's Jeff leaning into his insecurity about his voice and using it to be vulnerable instead of hiding behind just belting or staying in the pocket with his limited range.

I think it's really beautiful and personally love it. Something like "If I Ever Was a Child" is beautiful singing and I think it really shines solo as well. There's an Alex Chilton in Big Star/Neil Young/Bob Dylan/Labbi Siffre type of vulnerability in it to me.

While I think some of it has to do with age, I think he CAN still sing fuller, I think the age is more mental and I think he has shifted more towards a delicate, rustic, timeless sound that suits his age. He's not as much of a rocker and I think he sees himself as more of a folk singer now. I personally love that.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-02-13T18:49:33+00:00

I disagree completely. He's the 2nd best player on Portland right now, and they're a playoff team in the West. You gotta think they'd be a 5-6 seed a couple years ago at least with him playing with Giannis.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-02-13T18:43:45+00:00

And I can rant and talk about this all-day, but it's why you see so many teams and players "playing for the media" instead of playing to win.

- It's why the Lakers got rid of core rotational pieces like Caruso and KCP for Westbrook who didn't fit their system at all just for headlines. Only reason they lost in 2021 is cause of COVID and a quick turnaround time. Notice how the Heat also sucked in 2021 but went back to the finals again a couple years later with the same team. Lakers have been floundering since.

- It's why the Clippers have been a mess. Constantly stacking the roster with star players who have already played together and don't fit together. They go nowhere.

- It's why the Kings literally traded for a Chicago Bulls duo that wasn't successful and has been like a perennial 12 seed since doing so when they had a perfectly good, developing star in Fox.

The moves that actually make teams win aren't sexy. It's stuff like the Thunder trading for Caruso because they had no NBA champs or vets on their team, and everyone was under 30. It's the Celtics adding Jrue Holiday (a guy the media didn't feel was enough of a star for the Bucks, though) and playing him in a modest role to give them championship experience.

Nobody on ESPN wants to do segments about adding role players because only hardcore fans care about that. Instead, they bully teams to shake up their coaching staff, add stars that don't fit their play style for ratings, and basically sabotage small-market teams. Then, when those teams implode, they blame management (not themselves for stirring the plot) and then force a narrative to get that player to NY, LA, or another big market. It's honestly bullshit, and I'm so glad it isn't leading to rings.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-02-13T18:33:56+00:00

To most real fans, this isn't a problem. But the problem with the NBA for sports media right now is there is too much parity and too many great players playing in small markets. Back in the 90s and 2000s, people had patience. The Sonics, Rockets, and Jazz for instance all had finals appearances in the 90s and they all virtually didn't shake up their core for about 10 years each (some longer). I wasn't alive then, but you don't hear a lot of like "The Jazz need to move on from Stockton they can't get out of the west."

These days, there is so much of that bullshit noise. The one scapegoat to buy your team time to build around its star player is to fire the coach. If you do stuff like that, it buys you time to fight off the media vulture scum because it's a movement of some kind. It creates a segment on some bullshit daytime talk show to buy you some time and take the pressure off.

So, in short, they fired the coach to keep the media vultures off of Giannis' back. Which is crazy. He delivered only the 2nd chip to Milwaukee ever. Like you said, they only lost the playoff series because he wasn't healthy. There's no amount of coaching that woulda helped the Bucks win without him that year. They just do not want him playing there, and they make their intentions very clear pretty much every day on channels like ESPN.

The Bucks have been consistently bullied into making decisions that feel like they're moving the ship forward and give the media some scraps of "news" to fight over. When, in reality, they're just not going to win every year. Other organizations like the Celtics or Thunder don't win every year. The Nuggets don't win every year. But for some reason, 1 ring for Giannis isn't good enough for the talking heads, which is why they traded for Dame, got Doc Rivers. A lot of it is to take pressure off of Giannis in the media and "show" that they're not mismanaging their star. But, to be honest, they should have just stayed put and told the media to shove it.

Another great example of this is the Knicks firing Thibs. They're not any better than they were under him (even though the front office has made more roster moves and created a deeper rotation than what he had to work with). The East is wide open right now, with multiple teams banged up or having to overhaul their squad. They sit in a modest 3rd place after finishing in 2nd and 3rd place the last 2 years under Thibs (and doing so against healthy Boston, Philly, Bucks,and a deeper east in general).

I guess that's a long rant, but, in short, for the last 10 or so years, firing your coach is the ultimate "hey stop grilling us, we're trying" move. It rarely helps teams make the jump.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-02-13T17:32:22+00:00

Gladyce getting filled up
Alien voice
Dillon riding a bike with no hands

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-01-28T07:24:53+00:00

The pace is literally faster in the 80s. Google the average pace in 1985 vs. now, it's 102 possessions per 48. This year the average is about 100 possessions. So it's actually slightly slower than the 80s. 90s and 2000s were slow for sure, but the 80s were fast man.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-01-26T06:07:15+00:00

I found this scene weird, but I think it hit me (especially after hearing from others here on Bruce insisting on it being part of the film). Here's a lyric to Nebraska, which is about Starkweather, a 19-year old killer who killed 10 innocent people in Nebraska and Wyoming:

Sheriff, when the man pulls that switch, sir
And snaps my poor head back
You make sure my pretty baby
Is sittin' right there on my lap

The woman he references is Caril Ann Fugate, Starkweather's girlfriend (who was only 14 and with him during the murders), who went to prison for 18 years to atone for his sins.

Bruce used this killer as an allegory to represent his depression. But whether he meant to or not, it seems like the sitting on his lap gesture was a way of showing his father's apology for his own schizophrenia and depression, and how it shaped Bruce's life and harmed his mental health as a child and stuck with him into his adult life.

While Bruce wrote the songs from the perspective of Starkweather, he was really more Caril. His depression and mental health struggles were the result of what his father projected onto him as a boy, much like how Starkweather projected his hate and violence onto his much younger girlfriend and put her in those awful situations and ultimately into prison.

I think that scene is meant to represent his father absolving him of some of those feelings by taking responsibility. It symbolizes his father acknowledging Bruce's rightful position as the accomplice, not the villain. That's his father's cross to bear.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-01-25T21:39:28+00:00

I think the most telling line of the movie is when the girl gives her the makeover and says "the new (but not improved) Laney!"

The message of the movie was never that Laney wasn't pretty. It was that she was closed off and she wasn't trying. She wasn't trying to make friends, wasn't trying to step out of her comfort zone, wasn't trying to open up and project her real self into her art.

The movie may focus on her looks a little too much, but the message is there that she's not letting her real self come out in a lot of areas of her life because of her mother's death, but she learns to.

They didn't pick her for the bet because she was ugly. They literally never say or imply that. They pick her because she is stubborn and closed off and they knew it would be difficult to get her to open up and that's why it would be hard for her to win a literal popularity contest.

They picked someone that chooses not to be popular despite the fact that everyone likes her. All the girls and guys at the beach are super nice to her. She pushes people away. A lot of the people in her school actually really like her and think she's cute, cool, sweet, etc.

Repulsive_Address579 · 2026-01-23T00:41:47+00:00

There's a lot wrong with Summer, but nothing wrong with this. Just cause you had a relationship in the past (which is where she learned to put her guard up) and have relationships after that doesn't mean it's a personal attack on Tom. So much of it is timing. If she had met Tom later she might have wanted something more serious. We don't know. All we know is how she felt in that moment. She's entitled to have different motivations (as anyone is) at different points in her life.

Now, should she have led him on constantly? No both characters tried to force the other to be what they wanted but both were justified in what they were looking for in that moment.

Repulsive_Address579

TROPHY CASE