longtimeman

You know what, I thought about this some more, and I think I'm biased from hearing Cale sing it in concert. It is a very specific song when it's sung from a Jewish perspective, and that's why I hate both Christians who have turned it into an evangelical song, but also hipsters who say that it's just about a guy trying to get laid. Both of them are way wide of the mark. I'm more of a Songs of Love and Hate fan than anything (although that early 70s 'Live' album is also incredible). The GP really can't handle categorising someone as either a saint or the literal devil, can they. It's so hard to separate Spector the artist from Spector the scumbag, mostly because he was a known scumbag even when he was being an artist. The Ramones hired him to produce because they loved his 60s girl group songs, and ended up having to live with a lunatic who pointed a gun at them. He should have been locked up decades before he eventually It was purely down to them not having a (regular) guitar. All anyone talked about was their lineup and how 'novel' it was, rather than how great the songs were. I don't remember any respectful mainstream coverage of them at the time - only maybe when Mark passed away. It's fun! I was discovering most of these artists in my late teens/twenties, and don't always think about them as often as I should (although without exaggerating, Leonard Cohen songs come into my head at least once every single day).

I'm no Dylan fanatic, and am a strong believer that not everything is (or should be) for everybody, but to get a better idea of him, check this out. You might still hate it, but at least you're judging him on his strongest music.

John Cale's is the perfect mix of the two (the experience and roughness of Lennie with the arrangement that JB copied). Maybe the least controversial 'unpopular opinion' ever, but sure. Imagine's not in my top 30 solo Lennon songs, but it's not bad. Now here is something unpopular - to single out that record, and in particular that song, as Spector's prime. I don't know if I agree, but your second point is indisputable. He has his high points and his low points. For me, almost everything he did between the mid 70s and mid 90s is great, passionate singing. The lesser known live album 'Hard Rain' is a classic of the hard edged singer songwriter genre. I'm not not in agreement with you here. When they came out, they were considered a novelty band, because people in the 90s were dumb. (If you don't believe, check out the popular sitcoms from then). They've held up incredibly well, but not as well as Nirvana imo.

Indirectly - I get Pink Floyd and Suicide, without whom Radiohead wouldn't exist, so in that way, yes.

I'm losing my mind over how hyped I am for the album. I have a bunch of stressful things coming up between now and release day, so I just want it to be March 24 already.

I have a lot of thoughts on this song, but don't want to bore everyone with them. Just a quick thought - Lana's music is often called 'cinematic'. Usually that just means that there are strings, but this song is cinematic in a different way - it follows the classic three act structure of movies (and plays). If you don't listen closely, it sounds like there are two parts, but I feel strongly there are three: Part 1: 0:00 to 2:40 Part 2: 2:40 to 5:14 Part 3: 5:14 to 7:13 Each one has a distinct soundstage and mood. People are so programmed to dance when they hear a beat that they miss that Part 3 is a culmination of, and not a relief from, the anger and sadness of the first two parts.

The only reaction video you ever need to watch. I am not kidding.

The Nobel prize for physics, for the spooky action of snatching our wigs at a distance.

It's to Pandora radio (I can't get access to it either, it seems to be just for the US?) but I wouldn't worry about it.

I feel the opposite. Listening over and over to A&W, I've come to the conclusion that Lana has for the greater part of her released material been writing just about herself. I don't mean that the songs are true stories of her life, I mean that she has emotionally only been expressing her own feelings, and not thinking about whether the listener can relate. (On that, she's on the right track, because many listeners are so shallow, I've heard reactors/reviewers say things like "I can't relate to this song because I've never been to LA." If that was what I was dealing with as an artist, I'd ignore everyone else as well.) I think with Lust For Life, she tried to universalise and make her songs about the general condition - that's what she actually meant when she talked about doing 'one for the fans'. Even then, a big part of the record was entirely about her, but fans thought she mean that she was going to go back to doing non stop bops, and were disappointed with the record. Since then, she's become more and more insular in her writing (NFR, Violet, Chemtrails, BB), and is not trying to write about the general human condition, except where it coincides with her own life. The two singles from this album show no sign at all of diverging from this.

If he finishes the video by punching himself in the face repeatedly, I might watch it.

Sorry for not picking up on it. I blame it on just watching a reaction video where a Taylor fan thought Wildflower Wildfire was about Lana being burnt in a wildfire when she was a little girl and ending up in hospital, so I'm not assuming the best when it comes to human intelligence.

I'm too tired today to pick up on whether something is sarcastic or not, but if not, or if someone in the future is confused, this is a jokey rejig of a copypasta originally about Demi Lovato https://www.billboard.com/music/pop/iggy-azalea-fake-demi-lovato-story-6398490/

As an old fan (in both senses of the word) it's great to welcome anyone who likes great music There's enough negativity from haters to add to internal conflict. And Sad Girl is a hell of an introduction.

Honestly it makes me feel strange to have to remind myself I live in a world where not everyone has heard Frankie Teardrop

There is so much to this song - lyrically, musically, production wise - that I feel the need to talk about it to everyone I know, but really all they need to do is listen. I hope this does something in the broader (ie non Lana and non music nerd) world, like Video Games did.

Even more astounding Spoiler with text in case embedding doesn't work:

I'm happy to trust good insiders when it comes to dates, titles and specific, unambiguous details, but they've proven again and again that they have no idea when it comes to song meanings, instrumentation, genres, etc.

I don't want it instead of the real cover, but I love this, and want to use it as an alt.

My policy of avoiding all partial/snippet leaks, and most of the pre-release 'insider' sourced news is really paying off. I wish I did not even know that A&W was two parts, but I knew nothing else about it, and the surprise was better than Christmas morning.

Has anybody got the guts to visit Reddit, and report on what they think about this?

I'm not normally one to get stuck into her team, but I guarantee nobody in her management even knows about the wrong lyrics, unless someone here has/will let them know. And by let them know, I don't mean leave an insta comment, I mean ring their office.

My understanding is that Youtube puts zero effort into verifying copyright claims, particularly when it's a big company making the claim. You have to prove that they don't own it. Because Lana is under contract to Interscope, they probably claim as much of her music as they can, even though they have no actual ownership over it. It's cheaper for Youtube to just agree with a claim than to spend even a minute to research it. eg https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/6/22820318/youtube-copyright-claims-transparency-report

They're just lyrics some fan (or general dummy) made up and posted before release.

I know there are poetic and rhythmic reasons for using the name, but it's also one city over from Arcadia, CA.