feedthecollapse
feedthecollapse
feedthecollapse

"I don't want to be a Snoopy, mama; I want to be a supreme!"

eh, it was nowhere near as undercooked as James was, but I didn't think this episode was that interesting bar a gag or two.

something that just occurred to me: Mr. Bergstrom originally appeared in the Lisa's Substitute episode, which had a b-story involving Bart running for class president. So I guess that half-ass appearance by Bergstrom in this episode is a callback to the original in more ways than one in that now Lisa is running for

I liked the Simpsons movie. It certainly would've been better had it came out a decade prior, but I thought was better than quite a bit of the preceding 6 or 7 seasons, better than most anything since then., and still rather good on its own.

The whole thing felt like a series of non-sequiturs (from the Silly Symphonies opening to the inexplicable Mr. Bergstrom appearance) randomly strung together hoping that it all made sense (it didn't). I sort of expected a wishy-washy "Both sides are bad" message when it comes to politics as a whole, but it didn't seem

I wasn't really disputing Nirvana's quality, just that they're held up as musically important and impactful as The Beatles or Led Zeppelin, etc… but I think it would be fairly easy to argue that the relatively smaller bands from the same era as Nirvana broke more ground (and even influenced Nirvana themselves in some

"Influence" is certainly not limited to sounding alike, but I think it's a bit of an indicator when relatively lesser bands seem to spawn more obvious imitators.

I would be interested in why Nirvana still matters. As near as I can tell, their influence on both the music industry and other musicians mostly stops around 1997 or so. As the article points out, most newer rock bands that sound 90s-esque generally sound like the relatively smaller bands from the same era (i.e.