Randall Ries

Kinda makes me wonder if it will get a purp for being trimmed. That's a man made cut there and not a result of a termite or baby chew. I personally can't own books like that.

On 1/6/2022 at 10:26 PM, EastEnd1 said:

During their experimental years... 1966, 1967... the Beatles were purposefully making music that COULDN'T be played live.  Strawberry Fields was just one example.  I remember listening to an old Billboard top 40 countdown this past summer on Sirius.  It was from 1967.  Some great songs came up... Bernadette (Four Tops), Happy Together (The Turtles), For What It's Worth (Buffalo Springfield)... even "This is My Song" (Petula Clark) and  "Something Stupid" (Frank and Nancy Sinatra)... catchy stuff, but stylistically such typical straightforward 1960s pop.  I remember wondering what the #1 song for that week was going to be... and then it arrived... Strawberry Fields Forever... my goodness, peppered (no pun intended) among that list, it sounded like a song that landed from outer space... so ridiculously different from the rest of the list with swirls and sounds that had never been heard before on a record.  The Beatles creative output really can't be over-estimated.  Competing musicians from the 1960s themselves have commented that they waited eagerly for the next Beatle album "to see where music was going". 

They really took a hard right, didn't they? They didn't seem to like performing live anyway. They couldn't be heard. Everything changed when Paul died and they hired Faul.

On 1/6/2022 at 10:37 PM, Point Five said:

Thanks! Those solos are dazzling. And it was much the same at the show I just saw. It was all solo acoustic, but there were many jaw-dropping moments where if you closed your eyes you'd swear it was 2 (or maybe even 3) guitarists playing together.

 

Yes! I would look at what he was doing and almost yell "OH, COME ON! THAT ISN'T EVEN A CHORD!" Haha!

On 1/6/2022 at 9:28 PM, oakman29 said:

The Beatles were far from simplistic music, its layered . As a musician myself I know its alot more difficult than you would think.

The new 5.1 mixes of The White Album bear that out. Each tune is treated to 3 mixes. Rear, front then center channels. Rev9 is interesting to say the least. Some are nearly karaoke.

On 1/6/2022 at 9:23 PM, Point Five said:

Oddly enough, I saw Richard Thompson live a month ago, and was completely blown away. I was a casual fan before, but I'm a superfan now. Finally broke down and got the Richard/Linda box set I've been flirting with, and have been bingeing his solo stuff from all eras as well. 

 

Good job! I have seen him live several times. Just sit there dumbfounded. Then stare at my own guitar for 2 weeks.

"Why can't YOU do that?" LOL!

One of my favorite pro vids of VBL 1952. Even his stage co-hosts are awestruck

On 1/6/2022 at 6:59 PM, Beyonder123 said:

This may be arguing semantics, but thats a solo Paul Mccartney song. I still get what you mean though. Dig A Pony is probably a better example.

All I know is The White Album and Let It Be always have a place in my collection. "Dear Prudence" was one of the most beautiful songs that ever came out of a Beatle. "Across The Universe" was as well. You saw "Pleasantville".
 

Tough book to find in high grade. This one is 7.0. Great wrap up to the Ra's Al Ghul saga.

On 1/6/2022 at 3:53 PM, fishbone said:

Was just listening to some great interviews on YouTube with Bill Bruford, and although he respects the fact that there is good pop music that has caught on with the masses over the last 50-60 years, it is clear that The Beatles et al. , musically, is really the very simplest arrangements of music available. For real music, Mr. Bruford keeps going back to Jazz and such as the "musician's music"..... if one is concerned with pushing the boundaries of what music is and can be. Some good pop music pushed things a bit, such as his bands Yes, King Crimson and others like old Genesis, Gong, etc. etc. etc., but even he admits they were still on the "primitive side"  ...... like the Beatles is kindergarten, King Crimson is grade 4, but great jazz is like high school .....

Pop has to be primitive, I guess. Or they aren't going to sell millions of "units". Jazz is nuts. Classical is, too. Bluegrass is otherworldly. You really have to have it together to play bluegrass. Some people might think it's "hick" music but try playing it.

I think in the cases of the Beatles and Led Zep, there is music to listen to while getting baked or laid. Then, there is music to listen to to listen to. Like listening to a kaleidoscope. The Al Di Meola, John McLaughlin & Paco De Lucia "Saturday Night In San Francisco" was just a taste of that tour. Listen to the audience recordings of that tour and you will be wearing you head in your back pocket.

It boils down to personal taste, I guess. Listen to Led Zeppelin all you want to. Just saying there's better stuff out there. We cut our teeth on that. After a bit we were like "Yes, yes. "Whole Lotta Love, Stairway To Heaven, Kashmir. What else is out here?" It gets tiresome after awhile. "Clapton, Ma-a-a-a-ann! PAGE, Ma-a-a-a-ann!" You go "Richard Thompson, Ma-a-a-a-ann!" or "Alejandro Escovedo, Ma-a-a-a-a-ann" and most people go "WHO?" Yeah. That's THEIR fault, not mine.

On 1/5/2022 at 10:57 PM, kav said:

Guess he never got the Led out.
 

Guess I can't stand Led Zeppelin. Pretty simple to understand, I think.

His "estate"? That sounds serious.

On 1/2/2022 at 8:34 PM, Roger66 said:

Ummm..   a BAT#1 you say  - that is an obvious major exception to our discussion and I would certainly not pass that up cover cleaned, missing back-cover in a blue, purple or raw.  There is no hit there regardless of its' encasing with so very few around and so many major high-rollers in play. 

It is a beauty. A complete, 9.0 o/w pager with only dirt removed. The buyer got it for a great price. Heritage says the owner is open to offers. Who among us would be trite enough to offer what the book sold for 1% over prime? In my mind, the book is unrestored. And yet, there are hundreds of books in that same category that got nailed for the same thing. Like an HOS 92 in 9.4 with a dot of black color touch at the top of the spine. The purple is a turn off. But in blue explaining the dot, it's less of a stigma to me. The CGC colors add insult to injury to me. I see CBCS books and I read the label before buying.

On 1/2/2022 at 8:06 PM, Roger66 said:

ignoring CGC purple labels is a bonus.

There is a Bat #1 in a purple holder. The only restoration done was.....cover cleaned. So, the resale value takes a hit because of the color of the label. Fact is, it's a Bat 1 as a Nine - Pernt - Oh. Unfairly penalized because some 75 years of light grime and particles were removed by apparently a liquid bath. The fact that CGC/CSS or whatever subdivision of CGC won't reveal their "dry" cleaning method leads me to believe that there has an aqueous element to it. Some sort of steam cleaning. I read something here awhile back that alluded to it. Huh. Last I heard, steam is aqueous. It isn't a gas. Not a solid either. Two faced at best. Manipulative at worst.

I would own that book all day and ask full blue label value if I were to sell it. As you pointed out, prejudice is immediate with a color scheme. CBCS blue at least allows a buyer to read the statistics, thereby having full disclosure. If 90% of the book isn't even the book, then I want to read about it. I DO appreciate the nature of disclosing restoration. Colored labels make it easy to discern. But it also can lead to in many cases complete dismissal of possibly owning a book that isn't as bad as the purple label make it out to be.

On 1/1/2022 at 3:04 PM, Roger66 said:

I 100% agree.  No offense but I loathe restored books and avoid them like the plague .  I recognize, however, that I may be in a distinct & shrinking minority but that is how I feel. The immediate recognition that CGC provides with a restored label is just another reason why I don't & won't submit books to CBCS.  Minimizing the 'stigma' that CBCS labels offers you is IMO another way of saying 'take advantage of the less sophisticated buyers.'  Restored is restored and the label needs to speak it loud & clear - stick with CGC.  My 2-cents. 

Do you really mean "Take advantage of buyers who can't read"? The fact is the purple label can make up the mind of a buyer immediately. That is unsophisticated. But just my opinion.

If I am to put a lot of money onto a book, I sort of want to be forced to read the label. If I see a purple label, I'm already prejudiced. If I read a CBCS blue label, I can get the same information I need without the purple, green thingy. It makes me consider the book info more closely. I am paying attention. If I see the words moderate or extensive, I'm out. Purple or blue. Slight? Then I can decide if I can live with slight CT or right edge trimmed. I can.

I'm sorry for those that need a color schematic to make their minds up for them. I prefer doing my diligence. If someone dumps $4k into a book without seriously researching the label that's right there in front of them, well what can I say? What can THEY say? "Oh no! I didn't read the information! I wanna refund!"

On 1/2/2022 at 2:40 PM, The Meta said:

Its possible to suspend belief so nutjobs don't all throw on a cape and start accosting people

Does anyone know the number of cases where people have been emulating a movie? I imagine it happens quite a lot more than I would think

Only one I have heard of was the urban legend where the boy climbed out onto a high rise roof in the 1950's and put on his Superman cape and flew straight into the sidewalk. I have to imagine most - if any - were like that. Children who thought it was the cape that was doing the flying.

Most people who are emulating people these days are either emulating fat-headed celebrities like any given Kardashian or emulating serial killers or school shooters and those are labeled so called "copycat crimes". Seems like no one ever takes it into their heads to do anything drastically heroic like intervening in a bank robbery and beating the living fux out of a bad guy. They just cower under the shelving.

I have a pretty keen sense of right and wrong and many times have wanted to go out and stop this garbage but it just isn't realistic. People like that go from being called "vigilantes" to "weirdos" to "Hey we gotta stop that psycho" in the media. Remember in the 1980's when the "Guardian Angels" took it upon themselves to guard neighborhoods? That caused more trouble than it stopped just by its very nature. Kinda like there would have been no Joker if Bruce Wayne hadn't lost his marbles as a kid sort of thing.

But, don't we all feel a little tingle when someone actually foils a violent crime in progress and messes up the "perp"? Real good? I think we need that. All the whoopings we take, the corruption in politics and big business. The robbery that is American Medicine. The theft that is Big Oil. Once in awhile it does my heart good to see some corrupt pig get what they deserve.

Too bad it happens so infrequently. We have become numb to crime right under our noses as we get screwed every single day of our lives and have to eat it.

I think 7.0

Probably 5.0 as it lies.

7.5

On 1/2/2022 at 10:11 AM, D84 said:

Even though the new trailer finally has me interested, I HATE that batsuit. 

"And starring Elvis Presley as Batman."

Part of the problem I have with the movies in general IS the suit. The comics (up to a certain year) portrayed his costume as cloth material except for the boots, gloves and utility belt. Not chainmail armor. Not heavy rubber. Not anything except suicidal cloth.

It gave me the impression that when he said he trained himself to perfection in body and mind, he meant it. It implied he was confident enough to use cloth and not a Firestone, double ply, steel belted radial as a costume. And sure. I get it. The unrealistic part was the law of averages dictated that he is going to take a bullet or a knife at some point.

But the panels that showed Bruce getting out of bed or working out illustrated that he was pretty messed up from the battles. Scar tissue galore. Which most wouldn't be there if he had been wearing a raised rubber tile floor as a costume. It also added to the human aspect too, of course. He has no otherwordly power or "super strength". He only relies on his wit and skill and employs help like Alfred or Oracle and even uses a teenager as a colorful target so he can close in and wreck someones life.

I think this is the comic Ross was referring to. I read that one as well and it made a point.
 

On 1/2/2022 at 10:28 AM, bentbryan said:

The suit I don’t mind, but the back of the cowl/ headpiece I think looks odd. 

Yep. Noticed that as well. Little too cranial.

On 12/31/2021 at 8:15 AM, Mecha_Fantastic said:

FWIW I loved Man Of Steel, except for Kevin Costner's laughable death scene. Besides that it's a pretty darn good film. I'd give it an 8-8.5/10. All the complaints seemed to be from people who didn't really KNOE the character, nor understand that this is a new incarnation of him. His behaviour is allowed to vary, especially this early on. 

Same. That death scene was completely unnecessary. Really? Suddenly needed to commit suicide to make one of his home spun morality plays? And people say I overreact sometimes. Martha must have been like "WTF, Jonathan?"

On 1/1/2022 at 7:57 PM, kav said:

he ease up a bit now.

On 1/1/2022 at 1:12 AM, kav said:

NSFW

 

Man, I can't STAND ADC. Never could. Nothing even remotely funny about him. Clod.

On 12/23/2021 at 6:23 PM, Galen130 said:

How did the spine edge look?  Clean or frayed?

Whoops. Perfect.