Poor things was... something. I feel like the film had INCREDIBLE potential. It was obvious made with passion considering the creativity and "experimental" nature of it (the camerawork, design of literally everything, music, and surrealist elements were amazing), but I feel like it was lackin

It wasn't a bad watch. In fact, I felt incredibly entertained during the entire movie. It was a good movie in the sense that it is unique, well-made, and ACTUALLY entertaining to watch. What rubs me the wrong way is that it seemed to present itself as a super radical, feminist film but lacked anything of actual substance.

I can understand, like others, how some people will hate it and some people will love it. It's a really middle-way type of movie. Like I said, there were incredible aspects to it, but I don't feel moved as a person that has already seen the movie. It didn't have a lasting affect on me.

There were so many missed opportunities throughout the plot, and it felt quite shallow; it even felt pretentious. It's like the movie was trying to protray itself as dramatic and revolutionary but only touched the tip of the iceburg for everything it tried to accomplish.

I know this review is incredibly vague, but this review is just about as moving as the movie itself. It's just nothing that will help you grow or realize anything about... anything. It had appealing elements, but that is all. It felt like no research was done, no point was being made, and no true thought was put into it.

Stranger Things wasn't a bad show. In fact, it was a great show to watch in the moment. The problem is that it was incredibly redundant.

It started off amazing. In fact, all of the seasons had aspects that were amazing and creative and absolutely thrilling. I fear, however, that there were so many parts of the show that just didn't need to be there. So many loose ends were left loose: I feel like 1/3 of the knots that needed to be tied were actually tied.

On top of that, there was so much wasted potential. All of the lose knots could have been explored and made an AMAZING story. There's also a lot of things that aren't loosed knots but still served no purpose at all? For example, Billy's to-be relationship with Karen? It was incredibly unexpected, creative, and something that I think many people other than myself would have liked to seen explored. It could've made an incredibly critique on something like the way pedophilia is normalized, or the unhappiness of the average mother in a nuclear family, but IT WASN'T!! I understand that the show wasn't political or anything and that "ohhh nononono you have it all wrong it wasnt explored bc that thing got billy!!!!" I DON'T CAREEE!!!!!!! There was so much wasted potential that it's actually infuriating.

It was also repetitive. It was scared to do anything remotely risky. Every season after the first felt useless because you know the what's going to happen. They're going to find out that the world is going to end, decide that they have to do something about it, almost die but never actually die because you might lose money by killing off popular characters, return to their lives as normal, and then repeat the exact same thing next season. That's all. Over and over again. I understand that conflict and solution are vital parts of a plot, but they just kept reusing the exact same idea with one or two more characters over and over again.

Everything just got bigger and bigger and it just felt like those stupid "OH MY GOD IT WAS HIM ALL ALONG!!!!!!!!!!!" shows that use that idea several times in a row. Nothing is special anymore; there's no mystery. The suspensful atmosphere that was there in the first season is nothing but a light dew atop the grass by the fourth. The one time they actually killed off an important character, he was brought back less than an episode later. (And no, Billy does NOT count in my eyes as an important character.)

All in all, there were awesome parts of the show (like Robin's character? Her lesbian rep was the first in FOREVER that felt like it wasn't just there so the company making the show could look "woke." It actually developed Steve's character and was really beautiful to watch such a friendship form). The problem is that so much of the show felt boring and repetitive. I think the only ACTUAL excitment I felt in the fourth season was watching Hopper survive in the gulag.

Helter Skelter was genuinely a really good film. The only reason it didn't make it to my super-awesome-cool list up above is because I was stupid and missed out on all the important points.

I watched it while I was super tired and COMPLETELY FORGOT or misunderstood most of the key points (forgot about the full-body surgery AND didnt realize that the clinic purposefully made the bodies rot).

If not for my stupidity, this film would've been a spectacular watch. In fact, REGARDLESS of my stupidity, it was still a great watch. I definetly reccommend it. While it's not as obvious with some of its points, the comments it makes on sexism and basically all that crazy shit about being a female(-celeberity) in this world; kind of like how The Substance does.

Anyway, watch it. It was amazing. And maybe read the manga, I haven't read it but I heard it's really good (I was blown away when I found out that the movie was a mere live action version to a manga).

Isle of Dogs mastered atmosphere in a way I've never seen before. The animation was stellar and completely over the top, and the way the human characters only said exactly what they needed to vs. the dogs being full of personality and sarcasm complimented each other amazingly. The story was comedic yet emotional and I absolutely loved it. However, I do have some complaints. Maybe I'm just not educated enough on this movie, but I felt like some of it's incredibly well crafted metaphors were either just pointless or too esoteric for me to grasp. The movie seemed chalked-full with metaphors, yet I couldn't put my finger on a single one. Not to mention, why Japan? If the film seemed to be mocking a problem so prevolent in American, made by Americans, why was it set in Japan? There are some little things that also seemed so silly. Why did that girl dog (I can't remember her name) have perfectly groomed and brushed fur at all times when the dogs all looked terrible to eccentuate the desolate nature of the island? One of the characters even pointed it ouot. For a movie that seemed to be one giant critique, I felt like it wasn't self aware at all. It'd say so clearly, "This is bad!" but next thing you know, the movie would seem to mindlessly do the exact same thing it was mocking. I don't know. It was a great movie, but I can't say it's on my top 10 list or anything. It's too bad; like I said: the animation and design was otherworldly and the plot itself was incredibly original and creative. I have a feeling I'm just dumb and not realizing something really, really important, but my feelings remain regardless.

The book definitely has its flaws. Its worldbuilding was flat at times, and the whole Racheal Rosen femme fatale was ridiculously sexist. It's hard for me to resonate with and enjoy a book that claims to be depicting what it means to be human or "alive", and then be horrible at depicting humanity. PKD did well at times with the parallels of androids, Rick, and Isadore, but Rachel Rosen as a character was another example of Man Tries to Write Seductress But Only Shows That He Can't Write Women Because He's Too Blinded By His Misogyny. Her character made it hard for me to enjoy a hefty part of the book (not to mention the fact that Rick's enlightenment at his ability to empathize with androids was ONLY BECAUSE HE WAS ATTRACTED TO THEM???). It reminded me a lot of when I read 1984 and couldn't really get past the sexist writing of Julia. These books are GOOD, but everytime their sex drive gets in the way of their writing, it ruins a LOT for me.

The story also felt oddly ambitious. It's a good book, yes, but PKD was trying to convey one idea with a million different examples, even though he didn't seem to pay too much attention to any of them in particular. However, I admit that that feeling might just be my own ignorance.

Those are my main critiques.

However, as I already said, the book WAS good. The line between alive and "not counting as life" is repeatedly shown to be unclear and indeterminable. Isadore mistakes the cat for an electric one, Rick is incredibly apathetic, Resch is mistaken for an android because he's sociopathic, etc. And as everyone else reviewing this book says, the androids are some of the most human and alive characters at all. They may not feel empathy, per se, but they have ambitions, they connect with other androids, they feel angst and pain, and they dream. They dream. The title of the book vividly summarizes the concept that the book is trying to convey (the title might just be my favorite part of the entire book): Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Do they rest with the same childish sleepiness and count sheep, as the old-fashioned gag suggests? Do they participate in this concept that only organic beings are so prone to? But that's not quite the question that the title is asking. In the book, Rick asks if androids dream in the same way that humans idealize things. That is something truly human. If androids really are so similar to humans, do they dream of their future the same way we do? THAT is something so human and so critical that the androids, too, find themselves capable of. They escape because they dream; they read books because they dream. They dream and they fantasize and they cry tears over their dreams, but they don't empathize as people do. I really do like this detail that PKD pointed out; what makes humans truly unique is their ability to empathize. (even though I think what makes us human is the ability to create art). However, if we CAN empathize, why don't we? The "specials" (people whose IQ has deteriorated due to the radioactive dust) and the electrics are seen as inferior, and humans have the ability to empathize with them, but they never do. They are never shown mercy. It's an ironic play on humanity and our priorities. We pride ourselves on something that we don't even use. The fact that people continue to pursue an electric life with dials, destruction, and escape shows that we don't utilize our ability to empathize.

I've seen other people discuss how the story also talks about the line between fiction and reality, and the constant substitutes that humanity is making for itself in the book. The very existence of androids is a substitute with and of itself: the empathy boxes, the dials, Buster Friendly, Mercer, the new planets... it's all a substitute for something that was already there. People could've been happy with nature, but they decided to continue making substitutes. This leans onto the "fiction vs reality" idea: what counts as a substitute and what counts as real? What is genuine? What makes a substitute count? And all back into the android vs human thingy: what makes an android "human-enough" to be "human"? Then back again, do they dream? Do they dream at night, or dream of status and power and social acceptance? They do. Time and time again, they wish to be either human, equal to humans, or accepted by humans. They desire social acceptance. This makes the electric sheep symbol special because owning an animal is a status symbol. Owning a real animal makes people want to accept you. Do androids dream of electric sheep—something, even if it's fake, to make them equal to humans? Or would they dream of electric sheep as a counterpart of themselves? Would an android sheep be more special than a real sheep to them because they can resonate with their artificual make-up, and possibly get them even closer to the ability to empathize? The constant strain on everyone due to this desire to reach something "greater"—something "ideal" only ruins you the closer you get to reaching it. Even after Rick's religious "enlightenment" (using a lot of air quotes right now!!!), he's disappointed that the toad is artificial. We are an insatiable species, as are our copies. Even the androids have the same pretentious nature as we people do in the book. The androids flee to escape slavery, but as soon as the group of androids we see meets a kind man, they immidiently use him without a single thought. This could be an example their "pure lack of empathy", but I think the feeling of superiority they (and by they, I mean Pris) display was on purpose. Isadore, the most inferior of them all, truly is the kindest, most human one of them all.

Some parts of the story have no build-up while others have so many little, insignificant details that I don't feel compelled to look into them. But it WAS a good book, and it's a sci-fi classic for a reason. I actually only read the book because Imai kept writing Buck-Tick songs about it!!!

Before you leave, I want to highlight that I left out a LOT of information. This isn't an analysis, just a review.

I read animal farm in a couple of mere hours. I'm inly including this review WITH a review of 1984 because 1) his ideas in the two books are very similar and 2) because i waited way too long to write about 1984 and cant remember anything I originally wanted to put in the review.

Orwell has a way of writing that conveys complex ideas by using blunt, simple, and obvious metaphors. His work can be cryptic at times, but so is literally every other piece of literature ever, so I don't consider that a particular drawback.

Animal farm, to me, is an example of how both capitalism AND communism follow the same fundamental rules that will inevitably lead to failure. They have a majority on the bottom and a few at the top. While it was an obvious allegory for communism, I was completely hooked on the fact it was actually about capitalism. AKA they both STINK!!!!

I really don't have much to say. they are great examples of the nature of people and how we perceive and interact with politics and are both, while heavily dramatic and exaggerates, GREAT depictions of humanity in general. They have their flaws, but are overall very good books. There's not much for me to say because these books are extremely obvious on their own; nothing NEEDS to be said because they said it already. Read them, they're very good.

The main idea I got from Animal Farm was that power is unethical because corruption is unethical. We are shown a "good' and "bad" leader from the beginning (Snowball and Napoleon), whom I was told were based after a people's person communist kind of guy and another super-power-loving capitalism (both of which I don't want to care to research), but are shown that corruption happens either way. All the apples and all of the milk went to the pigs from the begining, even when all animals were equal (in theory). Even if, in some magical universe, a good leader would not be corrupt, they will eventually die and their successor will be corrupt, or their successor, or their successor, OR SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE. Yes, everything is ephemeral and that is why we should strive to be our best selves as soon as possible, but we should also set goals and systems in place that have our long-term best interest in mind.

What was interesting about 1984 is that it was moreso a demonstration of human nature. It told the tale of how people will always rebel, but not necessarily do it right. Winston didn't have his heart in the right place ever. Even when he confessed to O'Brien and O'Brien asked what lengths he was willing to go to in order to betray the Party, Winston didn't have his heart set in the right place. He said he would, if told, throw acid in a child's face if it was to betray the Party, despite one of the main problems of the Party being that they indoctrinate and harm children. He only moved from one extreme to another. People will rebel, which is good, but rebellion needs to be done right, or else we'll all end up loving Big Brother. It's the same with Animal Farm. We need to find a different answer to the question of, "How can we set up a system of government that gives people the ability and power to live a happy, equal life?" If we don't find the right way, all people will be equal, but some people will be more equal than others.

When the Wind blows is a refreshingly faithful multi-media adaptation based on the comic book with the same name. It's about an elderly couple just doing what feels right to survive when a nuke hits their country.

I watched this movie with my friend today because he reccommended it to me; it absolutely blew my mind away. The children's-book artstyle was nostalgic enough made you feel for the story automatically, but the sudden stop-motion and real footage scenes woke you up and reminded you that what happened to the couple is a very real thing. It was extremely well done in every way.

The couple's descent as their conditions worsened with radiation poisoning was sickening to watch. The movie is holding people in power responsible for not giving the public the proper resources to survive, as well as for letting a war happen in the first place.

The couple stays hopeful despite their descent and guarenteed death even though there is abundant proof that things are not as well as they seem. All the plants are dead, the sun is covered by a radioactive fog, their house is destroyed, all nearby animals have died, there's nobody nearby to be found, and every resource leading to their house has been cut off. Water, electricity, radio, etc. In the husband's own words, "Everything has gone dead!"

The couple listens to an outdated and contradictory manual to keep themselves alive and only dig their own graves by going about life as normal. They walk outside and expose themselves to the contaminated air (which they were already exposed to for not blocking off their refuge + the windows breaking in) and continute to spend time in the refuge despite the fact that they had a cellar. There were many things they could've done that would've helped them survive, but they didn't because the government provided absolutely no helpful information to the public, except for a warning only 3 minutes before the bomb hit. No information or emergency services were sent out, leaving those who may have survived completely in the dark.

What is so sad about this story is that, again, they could've lived. They're blinded with patriotism and faith in the government, even though the government is exactly why they and everyone in the surronding area has died. The government has completely neglected to provide ANY resources/information to the public, and it was the government that allowed the war to happen in the first place. It was the negligence of the people in power that leads to humanity's end. Their negligence empowers the ignorance of the masses: the title says it all, it is the very wind the couple enjoys that brings their death. That wind carries the radiation and conpromises everything; the very rainwater they collected to drink was carried by the same cloud.

I actually learned of this because my previously mentioned friend said "ohh ___ reminds me of When the Wind Blows!" because I mentioned that I've been listening to Sid Vicious ON THE BEACH by Buck-Tick a lot. This song is a refernce to (according to Cayce, whom I trust with my life for no reason) Einstein on the Beach, an experimental opera that is a reference to On the Beach, a 1957 novel about a group of people in Austrailia awaiting their death as the radiation of a prior nuclear war moves south towards them (I really want to read this book!!). This book is a reference to T.S. Elliot's poem "The Hollow Men" (I think), which says "This is the way the world ends (x3) / Not with a bang, but with a whimper". On the Beach emphasizes this with the "not with a bang" part being about the nuclear war, and the "but with a whimper" part being humanity and all life on Earth left to do nothing but reminisce as they await their death. Sid Vicious ON THE BEACH seems to be depicting the same scenario as the novel. If I'm right, the narrator is outside (probably on the beach), watching the clouds in the radioactive sky brush the winds his way. He is left to do nothing but mourn humanity and curse that we are so selfish and incapable of loving each other, despite love being the one things that will deepen our understanding of life (if that doesn't make sense, you need to immerse yourself in Buck-Tick. "Love is the only thing out there, you know"). I might have misunderstood this entirely, but he pictures the approaching dust as a sort of angelic-like figure of a woman approaching him, embodying humanity by spreading her "love" everywhere she goes, even though her love is only the promise of death.

This isn't even about the movie I watched anymore but it's ok because this is my Buck-Tick fansite and I can do whatever I want. My favorite quote from the song (Cayce's translation) has to be:

We don't learn from experience

No one will save us

On this planet where we just can't get along

And he murmured (could've been "I" as that's what Lola translated it as, Japanese doesn't really have specifying pronouns)

"Chaos will mark our graves"

Wuthering Heights was an excellent novel. I honestly would probably enjoy it 10x more if I could find some real analysis on it. The problem I'm having with this book (which is the same that I had with Orwell's books and Do Andriods Dream of Electric Sheep? is that there's no proper analysis out there. With Lolita and Poor Things and random pieces of film and literature, there's plently of extremely in-depth analysis done by people who have researched these things for years on end. I can't consider myself educated on something until I've taken in an acceptable amount of information and can speak on the topic for myself and begin to formulate my own ideas.

One of the main points you'll see mentioned about Wuthering Heights is the duality of nature and polite society. The Heights will be taken, Catherine will be married away, and the wild atmosphere of the Earnshaws eroding with time all seem to point to how civilization will always tame nature and the wilderness (if we let it). We have a natural connection to nature and to be taken from it is to be disregarded. Catherine's illness wasn't just a betrayal of the self; her illness was the embodiment of what the sudden transition from natural to acceptable does to a person, especially women, who have it much harder (Homesickness being considered a legitimate illness at the time also makes Catherine's death all the more emotional). The emphasis on classes is also a symbol of this. The Grange was overral very clean and uptight, as the upper class are expected to be, and the disparity between the servants and rich were apparent. Even in the Heights, Nelly started out as an equal: she was a sort of foster sister to the rest of the children. It was only as she grew—and the equality and peace of Nature was being stripped away—that she grew to be more of a servant than anything. This book seems to be mocking how seriously we take these made up rules (such as how the rich, poor, woman, etc. should behave) and portraying what blind obedience to them does.

That is why forgiveness is so important. Abuse is one of the main factors that erodes everyone, not just the Grange or the Heights. Abuse is so normalized where they are and it only furthers the spread of this plague we call "the expectation to be acceptable." It is forgiveness that will let you thrive. In the end, when the most vengeful character (Healthcliff) falls and Catherine and Hareton fall in love and live peacefully with Nelly while claiming to have the ultimate revenge by being Loving, the peace and comfort of the Heights is restored. It may not be as chaotic and wild as before, but the precense of Nature is still there. In fact, it might even be better, as the pursuit of Love and refusal to seek revenge is the best cure-all. Considering that the couple was an obvious parallel to Catherine and Heathcliff and was what they could've been, this point is very clear.

I quite enjoyed the book. While I'm absolutely sure that I'm missing a significant portion of the book's point, I'm satisfied with what I was able to gather from it. Symbolism aside, the plot was also very interesting. My only complaint actually relies on myself: I'm dissapointed that I rushed through the book and didn't understand half of what it was saying! I would've enjoyed it much more if I wasn't so stressed about getting to the end. It's actually not what I was expecting at all; most people hear that it's a romance, but I was under the impression that it was a gothic novel. It was to an extent, but I invisioned it being more akin to Poe or Lovecraft than... I don't know, maybe Nabokov? I can't say I've ever really read anything like it before, so there's nothing for me to compare it to. Regardless, it was a great read!

The Stepford Wives was an excellent movie. With most movie adaptations of books, I feel like there's an eerie lack to them. They may be amazing in every way, but you can usually tell by the pace and unique plots of them that they're adaptations. Oftentimes, this leaves me dissapointed and curious: If the movie is this good, imagine how good the book is! Should I even watch this movie if I know the book is probably way better? Although it should make you want to read the book, a truly good movie should never make you want to stop watching it. That is exactly what The Stepford Wives was able to achieve.

Despite being an obvious political statement, the movie was stuck between priortizing the plotline over the politics. That is what X (2022 film; prequel to Pearl) failed to do—the movie wanted to be special and parade a sort of "feminist" plot for obvious marketing purposes, even though the movie didn't have anything unique to say at all. The points were poor, the story was predictable, and the characters and their dynamics often fell flat. That is what The Substance did great: it used its horror themes to extend its political ones. The body horror was used to depict the fear of being "ugly" as a woman and the horror of falling victim—consciously or unconsciously—to the completely barbaric standards we push onto women with every move we make. The Stepford Wives, like The Substance, was able to use its plot to its own advantage. However, what amazed me is that the film still felt like the plot itself was the main focus; they're just amazing at what they do!

The Stepford Wives is a movie about women and their pressures. The men in this movie create robots of their wives that are "perfect" and all the exact same. The original women are (or were) spunky, independent, intelligent women with hobbies and passions and love in their hearts. They have their own opinions about the patriarchy and fashion and the world around them. The women take on feminine and motherly roles not because they're expected to, but because that's what they want to do (whether it be for one reason or another). The men see their wives not as people, but as mere objects. Lesser being meant to clean, cook, serve, and make love. They don't love their wives for their unique personalities or compelling characteristics because they love women who act, talk, breathe, sleep, dance, and do everything as "womanly" as possible. They're not women, they're sex-bots!

Anyway, what I quite liked about this movie is that there isn't much to say. The message was clear and to-the-point. We are never as close to reaching an equal society for men and women, so we ought to pick up the pace. Don't excuse that sexist comment. Don't wear makeup and trendy clothes because someone else wants you to be pretty. Don't do what you "must do because you're a woman and you absolutely must." I would 100% reccommend this movie; even if you're not interested in politics, the plotline (as I stated earlier) was incredible.

Unfornately, I'll actually have to come up with my own ideas for this review because it's too esoteric for me to find any analysis online.

The Necrophiliac is, unsurprisingly, a book about a necrophiliac written in entries as he continuously digs up old graves to sustain his habit. Taking clear inspiration from Lolita (many people said the same, so it's not just me being a Lolita fanboy), the prose is hopelessly endearing. Lucian writes like he lives to love language, similar to Humburt, yet remains a descpicable person. They're two sides of the same coin: connoisseurs of forbidden love and terribly stuck-up. The Necrophiliac doesn't have much of a plot because the majority of the story is about learning of Lucian's mindset. He's not describing much of his surroundings, nobody does: he is describing his thoughts.

I find books like these to be incredibly intertaining. Not only do I love melancholic, revolutionary classics, but these all have a point to make: maybe The Necrophiliac isn't as much of a masterpiece as other works out there, but it truly was amazing. I really think it kind of stands for the same thing as Lolita. Outcasts—sexual deviants in these cases, being obvious and common examples—are people, too; still, they remain monsters among the masses. When confronted with their own wrongdoings, few enlighten themselves and take accountability. More often than not, they live akin to Humburt and Lucian. Denial and the refusal to be blatantly wrong prompts a downward spiral in people's heads. They silently live believing themselves to be superior to their peers as their terrible habits only fester.

Lucian very well could be a metaphor for something else, but being the Lolita fanatic I am, this is what I gathered from my read. I actually saw somebody say that Lucian is a wonderful example of someone unable to bond with others unless in complete control; this explains his lonesomeness, why the siblings' deaths were so profound to him, why he was enraged at the girl puking on him, etc. I suppose the beauty of art is that it is what the reader interprets that matters.

I quite enjoyed this book; it took me but a mere few hours to read start-to-finish. I'd certainly reccommend it to those who have a passion for melancholic and macabre literature that prioritzes morals and mental deterioration over some boring plot.

Der Zibet is a band whose members are very close to the Buck-Tick members (and there's Issay and Atsushi's decade long situationship). I can appreciate the musicianship of their work, but I've never been able to really get into their music: that was until I found this album. It still stands as the only album of theirs I can truly enjoy, but that's okay with me. I would call this album very... dreamy. Like you're just waking up from a good dream and you're just rowing along the ocean of consciousness in your mind, still happy from the dream but not sure why.

I was actually on the fence about whether or not I should put this one on the list. It's not as good, per se, as the other albums, but I just couldn't stop thinking about it when I was brainstorming albums to put on this list. It's good, but I wouldn't suggest listening to this one above the others on this list (maybe it's just the Sakurai fan in me, but Koi no Hallelujah is definetly the best track).

Issay was the vocalist of Der Zibet, the band who wrote the album that I mentioned just before this. Atsushi actually sung on this album!

Mori no Hito is a 1998 album by Masami Tsuchiya. To nobody's surprise, I found this album because Atsushi sung on a couple tracks. Tsuchiya actually has a LOT of history with Buck-Tick and visual kei/jrock, but that's a story for another time. This album is a protest against environmental destruction, hence the title, Forest People. Because the album is supposed to be against deforestation, the booklets and stuff were printed on recycled paper. How fun!

This album is very soothing. Being a statment against destroying natural habitats and the like, the music is very calming sounds like the type of thing you'd hear in a forest, like birdcalls and bug sounds. It really pulls you in with the image of a Disney forest it evokes (think of a group of fairies or Greek nymphs) and lets you form a connection and appreciation for that comfort. It then strips away all of that comfort with sudden distressed tracks of a mystical voice saying things like "When the forest is gone, where will we all go?" and talking about a tradiional religion held in her area (the forest). It strips it away from you like the natural habitat is being stripped away from so many wild animals. That's how I interpreted it, at least.

Mori no Hito is probably my favorite of all the albums on this list. It's just so well done in every way.

Like a lot of Tsuchiya's work, Rice Music has a very fun and whimsical feel to it. Rice Music is nostaligc... not as in it actually evokes imagery from my childhood, but that it reminds me of what is was like to sit in elementary school music class. It feels like one of your memories that's just out of reach.

I found Farmer because I was sick of not knowing who she was despite being such a Malice Mizer fan. I caved and listened to her back in June and regretted waiting so long; I even analyzed her debut single!

I saw someone once describe her music as "very sensual and melancholic" and I think that's pretty much the best description I can give. This album sounds like what it feels to watch an old but iconic movie at 8pm at night—it's like watching a young women descent into misery and sexual frustration.

I technically don't count this album specifically because I fell in love with all of their albums in 2024. I don't know that much about them, but I love all of their music so, so much.

Deadman music is like the perfect embodiment of when you're watching a movie or anything fiction and a character is clinically insane but is roaming free. Deadman feels like that; the music and videos feel and sound like a perfectly realistic depiction of the traumatized and consequently insane, and all the more terrifying/interesting because of it. It's rare to find artists who actually care about the psychology of their characters.

Ai no Wakusei (Planet of Love) was much less a concept album and much more a chance for Atsushi to have some fun. Of course, the album is all very Acchan-esque, but I wouldn't call it "him manifested into sound" or anything. It's very good, however. There isn't a looming "feeling" of this album. I have the live DVD myself and I quite enjoyed seeing him just loosen up a little bit, even if this was still when Atsushi was upholding his serious stage persona (even though he was much more relaxed than in the 90s).

Like most of the albums on this list, I found Guniw Tools because they worked with Buck-Tick a lot (Hi, Jake.) This album is similar to Ai no Wakusei in the manner that there doesn't seem to be an overlapping "feeling" of the album (but I also never translated any lyrics or anything, so my word isn't as trustworthy as you might think). I quite it enjoyed it regardless.

This band is notorious for being one of those super cultured, artsy, and experimental bands. Do what you want with that information.

Like Flowers, I wasn't sure whether or not I should put this album on this list. I enjoyed Soft Ballet a lot last year, but no album in particular ever spoke to me (not to be confused with me using I am here as a placeholder because I felt that connection to all of deadman's music). Despite all of that, if I was going to put them (which I couldn't get out of my head, so it was going to happen one way or another), this album felt right. The name feels special. (I'm so sorry Passing Mountain... why did they have to release you on EARTH BORN...)