ash_whiting
Joined Nov 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews3
ash_whiting's rating
Not a bad effort. However, it would have greatly benefited from featuring a lot more of the bands who were influenced by the original wave. It suffered slightly from only really talking about the main players in this "scene" - Not that it ever really was one, outside of the music press.
Would have been nice in the last half hour, rather than it kind of petering out, to feature the new wave. People who have been influenced by it. More than just a name on a screen and a couple of photos.
Having said this, it's lovely to see some interviews with Guthrie, Kevin Shields, etc and to get their take on the goings on back then.
Not really sure about the addition of Billy Corgan and Trent Reznor though. Never really considered their music either influenced by, or relevant to, these bands.
Maybe they needed them. Just in case the American Market didn't understand the point of the doc... Seemed pointless to me. The sort of people who will watch this doc are the sort of people who don't need Billy Corgan spoon feeding them what they already know. It just came across as mildly patronising to be honest.
In fact, you could argue that the American Bands of the time kind of ruined it all in the eyes of the music press. Smashing Pumpkins, kind of being one of the bands that caused the press backlash in the first place.
Kind of ironic. That.
Oh. And lovely to see that old git Alan McGee churning out his "Loveless is overrated" tirade yet again.
No mate. You are just bitter that they didn't want a drug addict ruining their buzz in the studio. And it cost you a few quid.
Still. Less than you ever spent on drugs. And nowhere near the amount you pretended it cost to perpetrate your sad, mad, self-mythologising. So there's that.
God if I have to hear that wizened old man saying that again, I'll kill myself.
He didn't support these bands. He let them flounder, and as Kevin Shields rightly said, "He was just a drug addict who didn't understand what we were trying to do"
Yup.
Still. I waited a long time for this to surface. I paid me money and was happy to see some of the more obscure bands mentioned (Flying Saucer Attack, Pale Saints) amongst the others.
So all in all, if you like these bands. This won't tell you anything you don't already know. It'll preach to the converted. But I give it a 7 because this doc shone a light on an otherwise overlooked scene that meant a lot to me when I was a kid.
And you can shout "F**k off McGee, you utter, utter twit" at the telly whenever he comes on.
Also. Bobby Gillespie.
Nah. Never took that wee chancer seriously, either.
Some good live footage I'd not seen before too. So hooray for that.
Would have been nice in the last half hour, rather than it kind of petering out, to feature the new wave. People who have been influenced by it. More than just a name on a screen and a couple of photos.
Having said this, it's lovely to see some interviews with Guthrie, Kevin Shields, etc and to get their take on the goings on back then.
Not really sure about the addition of Billy Corgan and Trent Reznor though. Never really considered their music either influenced by, or relevant to, these bands.
Maybe they needed them. Just in case the American Market didn't understand the point of the doc... Seemed pointless to me. The sort of people who will watch this doc are the sort of people who don't need Billy Corgan spoon feeding them what they already know. It just came across as mildly patronising to be honest.
In fact, you could argue that the American Bands of the time kind of ruined it all in the eyes of the music press. Smashing Pumpkins, kind of being one of the bands that caused the press backlash in the first place.
Kind of ironic. That.
Oh. And lovely to see that old git Alan McGee churning out his "Loveless is overrated" tirade yet again.
No mate. You are just bitter that they didn't want a drug addict ruining their buzz in the studio. And it cost you a few quid.
Still. Less than you ever spent on drugs. And nowhere near the amount you pretended it cost to perpetrate your sad, mad, self-mythologising. So there's that.
God if I have to hear that wizened old man saying that again, I'll kill myself.
He didn't support these bands. He let them flounder, and as Kevin Shields rightly said, "He was just a drug addict who didn't understand what we were trying to do"
Yup.
Still. I waited a long time for this to surface. I paid me money and was happy to see some of the more obscure bands mentioned (Flying Saucer Attack, Pale Saints) amongst the others.
So all in all, if you like these bands. This won't tell you anything you don't already know. It'll preach to the converted. But I give it a 7 because this doc shone a light on an otherwise overlooked scene that meant a lot to me when I was a kid.
And you can shout "F**k off McGee, you utter, utter twit" at the telly whenever he comes on.
Also. Bobby Gillespie.
Nah. Never took that wee chancer seriously, either.
Some good live footage I'd not seen before too. So hooray for that.
This film is pretty damned good.
The same people who jump on IMDb with their "opinions" that I read day in, day out. Have no clue what makes a well structured movie at all. They just jump in with their opinions. Which are based on literally nothing.
This is a very cleverly structured movie. It is slow. It moves along at it's own, natural pace. Everything is considered. Every little detail has a reason to exist.
It's narrative structure is second to none. It teases. It messes with you.
It's pure Tarantino.
All you people who just bullshit. Firstly. Learn how to construct a reasoned argument. Secondly. Watch some films.
This isn't popcorn entertainment. You might actually need to use your brain a little.
I hate IMDb. It's a haven for utter, utter retards who need their art spoonfed to them. Even when it is. They don't understand it and would be better off just watching the latest Michael Bay flick.
Why not just shut the hell up. And stop boring us with your "opinion"
How many films have you made?
Er. None.
How much understanding of the film making process do you have?
Er. None.
How many scripts have you seen from paper to screen?
Er. None.
So do me a favour and shut the hell up.
The same people who jump on IMDb with their "opinions" that I read day in, day out. Have no clue what makes a well structured movie at all. They just jump in with their opinions. Which are based on literally nothing.
This is a very cleverly structured movie. It is slow. It moves along at it's own, natural pace. Everything is considered. Every little detail has a reason to exist.
It's narrative structure is second to none. It teases. It messes with you.
It's pure Tarantino.
All you people who just bullshit. Firstly. Learn how to construct a reasoned argument. Secondly. Watch some films.
This isn't popcorn entertainment. You might actually need to use your brain a little.
I hate IMDb. It's a haven for utter, utter retards who need their art spoonfed to them. Even when it is. They don't understand it and would be better off just watching the latest Michael Bay flick.
Why not just shut the hell up. And stop boring us with your "opinion"
How many films have you made?
Er. None.
How much understanding of the film making process do you have?
Er. None.
How many scripts have you seen from paper to screen?
Er. None.
So do me a favour and shut the hell up.
It's like a terrible, nepotistic Hollywood in-crowd mumblecore hipster version of Weird Science. But not excellent. Like Weird Science is.
Plus if I have to sit through yet another meta-narrative, pixie-dream-girl, navel-gazing load of old offal sweepings where the lead actors tumble suggestively underwater to the strains of some bland, self-conscious, but oh-so achingly cool and beardy Williamsburg "folk" band, I'll probably shoot myself. In the balls.
Little Miss Sunshine is also awful. (made by the same talentless fools) There. I said it. Much like Ruby Sparks. It doesn't go anywhere, or actually say anything of any consequence. Even though it bamboozles you into thinking that it's somehow profound... Mainly by using arty shots of people intertwining themselves underwater in swimming pools. Ugh.
If my arse was a movie, I'd pay £13 to watch that instead.
Plus if I have to sit through yet another meta-narrative, pixie-dream-girl, navel-gazing load of old offal sweepings where the lead actors tumble suggestively underwater to the strains of some bland, self-conscious, but oh-so achingly cool and beardy Williamsburg "folk" band, I'll probably shoot myself. In the balls.
Little Miss Sunshine is also awful. (made by the same talentless fools) There. I said it. Much like Ruby Sparks. It doesn't go anywhere, or actually say anything of any consequence. Even though it bamboozles you into thinking that it's somehow profound... Mainly by using arty shots of people intertwining themselves underwater in swimming pools. Ugh.
If my arse was a movie, I'd pay £13 to watch that instead.