Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Maybe he meant that Dickens has only written 13,000 characters, as in letters. That would equate to a single short story though ... so probably less likely. Carry on.
>> ^spoco2:

Yeah, doing things like comparing yourself to extraordinary people from history tends to be completely self defeating and useless... why not be yourself and highlight your strengths rather than trying to emulate someone else.

Also... the figure quoted for the number of Dickens' characters sounds completely crap to me, and on looking it up I can only find references like "According to John R. Greenfield, in his Dictionary of British Literary Characters, Dickens created 989 named characters during his career." which is a long way off 13 thousand characters... and while he had many other characters that had no names, I'd rather be remembered for ONE great character rather than thousands of ones that are all much alike.
Which is not to say that Dickens created bland characters, AT ALL, his are some of the most memorable of all, to be sure, but trying to match pure volume is a stupid pursuit.
Now, having said that, High Fidelity and About a Boy are two great pieces of fiction to be sure!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Awesome. Don't forget to check out the Sifterview with Pomplamoose we did earlier in the year.

Thank you. Sat on the sidelines watching sifts long enough, time to make contributions.
I agree probably a bit commercial... and more a Ben Folds/Nick Hornby song featuring Pomplamoose, but it was on their page I found it.
I think my favorite bit is at the end when she does "girl gun sounds". Reminds me of a girl I know who can't do Boba Fet's gun sounds from Robot Chicken: Boba Fet Wins (which I thought I saw in the sift before but can't find right now).


>> ^Kevlar:

Quality first post, probie!

>> ^Xax:

Bah, too damned pretentious. "There are a gazillion pieces of sand on Earth, but you're just a lazy piece of shit."


lol, i thought the exact same thing
a good song otherwise though lol
ironic that they blog about playing with ninja turtle figures afterwards

>> ^MaxWilder:

I like all their stuff, together and solo. I'm surprised this hasn't been sifted before now.
Also, I found a video with the original song (I think).


Yep, that's the original. There's also a Peter Gabriel version, but yeah, no.

>> ^MaxWilder:

I'm surprised this hasn't been sifted before now.

That's cause no one can tell their songs apart! ZINGGGGG

I really like the Pomplamoose music, but I haven't liked any of their solo stuff. Both of their styles mix together to form something win, like cats and the internet, who knew?

While I've really enjoyed most of the Pomplamoose videos this one really falls flat for me. Aside from the cuteness appeal that she always has, it just seems she's not trying very hard at the singing. Also, part of what really made the original version so appealing was the unashamed sincerity. But though her standard amount of smirking and eye rolling it seems like she's being sarcastic. You know, about the love.

>> ^petpeeved:

Are they completing biting Pomplamoose's style or is this an example of parallel evolution?


Pomplamoose was not the first to this type of video. Also, the frames would change more if it was a direct rip.

Are they completing biting Pomplamoose's style or is this an example of parallel evolution?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Pomplamoose, Lady Gaga, telephone' to 'Pomplamoose, Lady Gaga, telephone, cover' - edited by kronosposeidon

Just heard this song used in a Toyota Avalon commercial. congrats Pomplamoose!

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I like them, but I know what you mean. Their reharmonized arrangements of banal pop tracks are clever and pithy, but at the end of the day, it's still a banal track at its core, and not the kind of thing I need to hear more than once. They could also stand to expand their orchestrational palette a bit too.

They do have their own material on their youtube channel... Not that I've listened to it, I enjoy their clever and pithy reharmonized arrangements of banal pop tracks.

>> ^volumptuous:
blech
If Lada Gaga isn't bad enough, now we have this. I know there's lots of fans here, and the band also parouses the sift and I hate to be mean to them, but holy hell this stuff is crazily boring to me.


I like them, but I know what you mean. Their reharmonized arrangements of banal pop tracks are clever and pithy, but at the end of the day, it's still a banal track at its core, and not the kind of thing I need to hear more than once. They could also stand to expand their orchestrational palette a bit too. Bust out that theremin. Get away from the drumset and bang on some household appliances. You don't need to have toy glock and toy piano on everything you do, the more you use them the less special those cool sounds become. There is a fine line between having a distinct stylized sound and having everything sound the same.

Sorry for the unsolicited advice if you are reading this Pomplamouse - as you are obviously very talented and have a huge fanase that loves you just as you are - but armchair criticism is the whole point of the internet, isn't it?

Your comment on this sift http://www.videosift.com/video/Pomplamoose-covers-Lady-Gaga broke the comments page!

Just an FYI.