Anonymous wrote:I turned it off when the druids showed up. I'll watch the rest later because I do want to see the 1989/Reputation parts.
For the casual fan above the age of 12 I don't know that it translates well to the small screen.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It does not capture the magic of being there in person, but my kids often have it on in the background.
Yeah I've seen Taylors last three tours, including this one, but I don't really see the point of watching it as a movie. To me, the appeal of this kind of spectacle is the collective effervescence of the being in the crowd.
I just said I as underwhelmed but this is idiotic. Of course you don't see the point if you have actually been to the shows -- a live show like this is meant to be experienced in person. The movie is always going to be a pale imitation and people know that, but also the vast majority of people cannot go see shows like this in person. How do you not understand this.
I understand that people can't see them in person, why would you think I don't? I'm saying that I don't know why you'd watch it even if you can't see it in person. She's done other concert movies of tours I didn't see and I've never bothered to watch those, because I don't see the point.
Anonymous wrote:Dumb question probably, but is she singing love in this?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It does not capture the magic of being there in person, but my kids often have it on in the background.
Yeah I've seen Taylors last three tours, including this one, but I don't really see the point of watching it as a movie. To me, the appeal of this kind of spectacle is the collective effervescence of the being in the crowd.
Anonymous wrote:Can someone please summarize what it looks like? Are the eras regarding her music? Is this the tour that she repeats across the globe?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Collective effervescence 😂😂
Swifties really do talk like that though
I'm the one who used that phrase and I was referencing the concept from Émile Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life, moments when a group is unified into a collective emotional state by performing the same action and having the same thoughts. It's a pretty common way of talking about any group experience like that.
TS isn’t an evil leprechaun that must be named in order to break from it’s spell.
It’s ok to give her credit for creating a show that by all accounts is magical.
+1
I got your reference when I first read it; it's clear the PPs aren't the brightest of bulbs.
That was unkind, but hey you won the internet!
I personally didn’t get the reference but definitely see the phenomena. The issue ts fans have is they don’t understand that the effervescence comes from the collective experience and not Taylor. I’m sure you, as one of the brightest bulbs, can easily recognize this and also see how trump manifests the same effervescent experience at his rallies.
If we name it, maybe people will be able to put fandom into perspective.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Collective effervescence 😂😂
Swifties really do talk like that though
I'm the one who used that phrase and I was referencing the concept from Émile Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life, moments when a group is unified into a collective emotional state by performing the same action and having the same thoughts. It's a pretty common way of talking about any group experience like that.
+1
I got your reference when I first read it; it's clear the PPs aren't the brightest of bulbs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Collective effervescence 😂😂
Swifties really do talk like that though
I'm the one who used that phrase and I was referencing the concept from Émile Durkheim's Elementary Forms of Religious Life, moments when a group is unified into a collective emotional state by performing the same action and having the same thoughts. It's a pretty common way of talking about any group experience like that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Watched it with my 10 yo. We enjoyed it but are not big enough fans to have gone to the theater. She looked good, the stage looked good, I liked her backup singers and dancers. I always think the logistics of costume changes are really interesting to see.
I was not aware of the swear words in so many songs, oops. I mostly know her 1989 stuff.
Me neither! I always thought her songs were clean and that's why they appealed to so many young girls--that is, until I saw her concert.![]()
I mean… they are pretty clean. It’s not “ WAP”😂
But I’ve been thinking about her use of swearing recently. I think there are times it’s needed, but there are a few instances of it just being a lazy lyric written , and that irritates me, because I think she is too smart for that. She’s cursing ,on occasion, to fill a beat. That bugs me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Watched it with my 10 yo. We enjoyed it but are not big enough fans to have gone to the theater. She looked good, the stage looked good, I liked her backup singers and dancers. I always think the logistics of costume changes are really interesting to see.
I was not aware of the swear words in so many songs, oops. I mostly know her 1989 stuff.
Me neither! I always thought her songs were clean and that's why they appealed to so many young girls--that is, until I saw her concert.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I found it underwhelming. I think the problem for me is that the show is obviously about showcasing her whole catalog, but I just really don't like some of her "eras." I think I'd much prefer a show that was just one of her albums I really like (1989 or Folklore maybe). I found myself getting genuinely irritated during sections for her albums I don't like, and realized in watching it that I actively dislike some of her songs that I think I'd previously just managed to avoid enough to be neutral.
My kid liked it though.
I’m afraid to ask what song left you do agitated.