The thing about Doug Loves Movies is that it's always rambly and never really goes anywhere. He should do more games and less chatting, since he's not a very good host as such. The podcast has more potential than it is using, since it has a theme and some good games. There just isn't enough structure.

Man I love Who Charted. Wee-wee and Kulap bring the greatness every episode. I don't know if Howard is really just being himself or what, but he's a really honest and hilarious presence.

I liked Nick DiPaolo and Artie Lange (and Ira), but I wasn't too keen on the other guests. Marc's attitude towards the Mormon girl was unsettling. He seemed to be trying too hard to mock the (admittedly ridiculous) beliefs and practices. He also seemed so fascinated with the author of the Humiliation book simply…

SUPPLIES!!!

I have been roundly rebuked for suggesting that their lack of current relevance equals a lack of historical importance. It is a good point and I concede it. But it doesn't change my opinion that their importance in rock history is not so high as the article suggests.

It's a fair point that their importance is not entirely defined by their current relevance. But the fact that they're still in the public consciousness doesn't do quite enough to justify the implicit claim made in the article that REM are the defining elder statesmen of American rock. There's a big difference between…

I don't mean that if I don't like them then they aren't good. My point is that if I don't like Radiohead's sound, it might not be true that the only reason is because I've never had it explained to me 'why it's good'. It might be that I just don't like it, explanation or no.

I don't think they don't deserve a place in the history of rock, as do the Pixies, etc. (sidenote: I DO think that VU deserves a more 'important' place than pretty much any band mentioned in the article or the comments though; they're hardly a relatively obscure band). In terms of importance of the rest of these…

I see your point. But also, the fact that all those guys list REM as a major influence doesn't mean that their respective bands weren't even more influential (Nirvana and Radiohead in particular). So I'll concede REMs place in the history of rock, but I still don't really think it's that incredible.
Who does REM count…

The problem is that the songs aren't ABOUT anything. It's all just a bunch of weird noise.

If it sounds anything like the abysmal performance they did on SNL, I'd say 'hard to enjoy' is a generous description. Also not sure what you mean by 'great singing' but warbling incoherent high-pitched whines doesn't qualify.

Is it crazy to suggest that if you have to explain why they're considered good, maybe they're not as good as you think?

If you amend that to read "Truckers with Jason Isbell", then I might be on board. They were definitely killing it with that lineup much more so than recently. Even with him, though, Wilco is certainly a competitor. Definitely moodier and a little less direct, but a worthy bunch of fellows.

God I hope this is a joke. The National is *slightly* better than Coldplay. It's good music to listen to once you're already asleep.

It was to point out that the author places far too much importance on REM. Their breakup means nothing, really. Also, Wilco and Radiohead are popular bands in a certain way.

I'm sure this has been mentioned here already but REM haven't made any relevant music in a long time. They don't need to be replaced, and I'm convinced that both Radiohead and Wilco will stand the test of time far better than REM. If you told me that REM broke up 5 years ago I wouldn't have been surprised. I haven't…

Absolutely. Tweedy writes emotionally satisfying songs the simultaneously deconstruct the process. Thom Yorke wails unintelligible syllables and writes songs with no melody or structure to speak of. While they both can be a bit depressing, Tweedy is more sincere in my opinion. Yorke is too weird for weird's sake.

No shit! Nobody writes anything sincere anymore. It's all a wasteland of shrugs, sarcasm, and affected apathy. Where's the good stuff??? Where have you gone, Raymond Carver?

I agree completely. Have you read Jonathan Lethem, and would you put him in this category? Or Dave Eggers? I'm curious because I have some of the same feelings about these guys but enjoyed what I've read of them much more than Foer.

Here I was hoping that the members of Anthrax would be performing as the stars this season. A little misleading with your headline there, guys. Thanks a lot for the letdown.