Greenforaday101 Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/13045-...tury-breakdown/Oh a 4.8, better than I predicted(3.2). But they certainly ripped the band a new one.My prediction of them hypocritically playing the pretentious card was right on though.
Juan Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 I'll quote the sexy guy in the middle of my sig: "Reviews are shit" ok, he didn't say that, and I might be biased but fuck them anyway
Greenforaday101 Posted May 23, 2009 Author Posted May 23, 2009 Reviews are fine, and people are entitled to their own opinion. But Pitchfork made no attempt to hide the fact that they thought this album was going to suck, even before they heard it. And as a publication, that is not only unbelievably pretentious, but also somewhat unethical.
Sharmellow Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Pretty harsh stuff. At least it's not poorly written.
SOMERTEN Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Now I know why I've never heard of Pitchfork.This review is so predictable and mundane I gave up reading it halfway through. I can't believe there are still people out there stupid enough to think Green Day should still be making records like Dookie at 37. Is that the best they can come up with? All the bad reviews are exactly the same.
Disappearing girl Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Now I know why I've never heard of Pitchfork.This review is so predictable and mundane I gave up reading it halfway through. I can't believe there are still people out there stupid enough to think Green Day should still be making records like Dookie at 37. Is that the best they can come up with? All the bad reviews are exactly the same.Pitchfork is a very image-conscious magazine that loves to get off on slating the potentially 'unhip' so that the journalists can attract readers and draw attention to thenselves. I've seen them give bands like Airborne Toxic Event 1.6/10 for a record! And they also battered MGMT before they got big... So I guess Green Day got off relatively OK! Their reviews are normally stylistically well-written, but in terms of substance, void.
Disappearing girl Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Eww, Pitchfork.I couldn't have said it better myself :-)
Swedish_Idiot Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 I couldn't have said it better myself :-)Haha, it's my true feelings towards them.I remember reading a while back that some of their reviewers don't even listen to the albums they're reviewing.
Disappearing girl Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Haha, it's my true feelings towards them.I remember reading a while back that some of their reviewers don't even listen to the albums they're reviewing.!It wouldn't surprise me!
rage-love-life Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 Did he even try to change his opinion? He was like, this will suck, and when I listen to it, it will suck even more!!! Yeah, he's entitled to his opinion, but he went reviewing it with a I will hate Green Day bias.
Greenforaday101 Posted May 23, 2009 Author Posted May 23, 2009 Their reviews are normally stylistically well-written, but in terms of substance, void.Perfectly put.
Kate Austen Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 This review was horrible - and why I can't stand pitchfork. They focus more on trashing bands then they do the actual music. Furthermore, they were writing articles four months back, that were making fun of 21st Century Breakdown. I've never seen a site so biased towards an album, then this one. How unprofessional. But hey, that is what one can expect from p4k. They cater to the indie crowds, and this albums is certainly "mainstream". I have no problem with reviews being negative, but I can't stand when they are rude/condescending. That drives me up the fucking wall. It just seems like an asshole thing to do, not only to the band/the fans of the band - BUT the serious readers of the reviewers site.With that said, fuck it. Overall, it seems 21st Century was received more poorly then American Idiot (not by much). But I don't care, I like it more.
IscoredWaddlesgoals Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 There's some bits I actually agree with and some that are just (in my opinion) rubbish. They appear to have wanted to trash it before writing it though, so we can't be too suprised. It reads in some parts like some of the other reviews - 'why can't they go back to Dookie, Longview etc', because they're 37 and Dookie was over 10 years ago. Get over it. Also, I really like 'Peacemaker' and I don't think it should have been left off, for me it's one of the best bits on the album.They're right with some of the comments on the lyrics/themes though. The bit they quoted at the end doesn't even make sense. Plus some of the acoustic start/loud finish songs get a bit repetitive after a while. Maybe it'd be nice to hear a slightly shorter album with no characters.
Greenforaday101 Posted May 23, 2009 Author Posted May 23, 2009 This review was horrible - and why I can't stand pitchfork. They focus more on trashing bands then they do the actual music. Furthermore, they were writing articles four months back, that were making fun of 21st Century Breakdown. I've never seen a site so biased towards an album, then this one. How unprofessional. But hey, that is what one can expect from p4k. They cater to the indie crowds, and this albums is certainly "mainstream". I have no problem with reviews being negative, but I can't stand when they are rude/condescending. That drives me up the fucking wall. It just seems like an asshole thing to do, not only to the band/the fans of the band - BUT the serious readers of the reviewers site.With that said, fuck it. Overall, it seems 21st Century was received more poorly then American Idiot (not by much). But I don't care, I like it more.I think it's been recieved about the same. There is the crowd that thinks it's good, and instead of the oh they sold out crowd it was replaced with the this is the same thing crowd.Plus I've heard some people who hated american idiot say they like 21st CBD. And about the lyrics, yeah, Billie Joe can't write as well as he did on dookie. But it's not bad, and at no point do the lyrics put me off the album, and sometimes they are pretty good, here and there.
Kate Austen Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 I actually thought this album had some of Billie's best lyrics to date. And I am very critical of his lyrical abilities. Sure it's easy to pick out the lyrics that are cheesy and not profound, but I think if you read 21st Cb front to back, you will be surprised how good of a lyricist he has become for this album.
justcause Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 What's ironic about this review is that it embodies what the writer accuses of 21CB - it's pompous, pretentious and totally devoid of wit, which seems to prove the point that you see your own faults most clearly in someone else. What is it that you love about music, reviewer? Where is that, anywhere in what you've written here? And this stuff with the 'inscrutable storylines' or whatever, the lyrics that you just don't get - I'm listening to GD's cover of Like A Rolling Stone right now, and wondering how this guy would get his head round the notion of 'the mystery tramp' if he won't even go the distance with 'when your mind breaks the spirit of your soul'. Is it so outrageous that some lyrics require a little thought and engagement, or does everything have to be literal and obvious? You know fuckit, I can really enjoy a bad review if it's done with gusto and humor - the gods of rock are there to be tilted at, like any other gods - but this shit is just bloodless, peevish negativity.
Greenforaday101 Posted May 23, 2009 Author Posted May 23, 2009 I actually thought this album had some of Billie's best lyrics to date. And I am very critical of his lyrical abilities. Sure it's easy to pick out the lyrics that are cheesy and not profound, but I think if you read 21st Cb front to back, you will be surprised how good of a lyricist he has become for this album.You're right, it's good. But I think that it's not his best. I think dookie is his best.But on the topic at hand, pitchfork sucks.What's ironic about this review is that it embodies what the writer accuses of 21CB - it's pompous, pretentious and totally devoid of wit, which seems to prove the point that you see your own faults most clearly in someone else. What is it that you love about music, reviewer? Where is that, anywhere in what you've written here? And this stuff with the 'inscrutable storylines' or whatever, the lyrics that you just don't get - I'm listening to GD's cover of Like A Rolling Stone right now, and wondering how this guy would get his head round the notion of 'the mystery tramp' if he won't even go the distance with 'when your mind breaks the spirit of your soul'. Is it so outrageous that some lyrics require a little thought and engagement, or does everything have to be literal and obvious? You know fuckit, I can really enjoy a bad review if it's done with gusto and humor - the gods of rock are there to be tilted at, like any other gods - but this shit is just bloodless, peevish negativity.I give your post a 10/10
Disappearing girl Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 What's ironic about this review is that it embodies what the writer accuses of 21CB - it's pompous, pretentious and totally devoid of wit, which seems to prove the point that you see your own faults most clearly in someone else. What is it that you love about music, reviewer? Where is that, anywhere in what you've written here? And this stuff with the 'inscrutable storylines' or whatever, the lyrics that you just don't get - I'm listening to GD's cover of Like A Rolling Stone right now, and wondering how this guy would get his head round the notion of 'the mystery tramp' if he won't even go the distance with 'when your mind breaks the spirit of your soul'. Is it so outrageous that some lyrics require a little thought and engagement, or does everything have to be literal and obvious? You know fuckit, I can really enjoy a bad review if it's done with gusto and humor - the gods of rock are there to be tilted at, like any other gods - but this shit is just bloodless, peevish negativity.If you like a BAD review, this has got to be the worst attack on an album I've ever seen. And The Guardian I think gave the same record 4 stars!http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/12191-...ne-toxic-event/
Sharmellow Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 If you like a BAD review, this has got to be the worst attack on an album I've ever seen. And The Guardian I think gave the same record 4 stars!http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/12191-...ne-toxic-event/Wow, that was awful.
Hermione Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 What's ironic about this review is that it embodies what the writer accuses of 21CB - it's pompous, pretentious and totally devoid of wit, which seems to prove the point that you see your own faults most clearly in someone else. What is it that you love about music, reviewer? Where is that, anywhere in what you've written here? And this stuff with the 'inscrutable storylines' or whatever, the lyrics that you just don't get - I'm listening to GD's cover of Like A Rolling Stone right now, and wondering how this guy would get his head round the notion of 'the mystery tramp' if he won't even go the distance with 'when your mind breaks the spirit of your soul'. Is it so outrageous that some lyrics require a little thought and engagement, or does everything have to be literal and obvious? You know fuckit, I can really enjoy a bad review if it's done with gusto and humor - the gods of rock are there to be tilted at, like any other gods - but this shit is just bloodless, peevish negativity.Amen. I'm not sure why someone like this with such a miserable outlook on music would want to become a music reviewer. One of life's great mysteries.
Eldoon Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 repeatin' my peace on this subject from the Metacritic thread:Pitchfork's review is up, as it was loading I kept thinking "haha they'll give it a 4 or something," and, SURPRISE, I think it got like a 4.8.So, no big deal...this is Pitchfork going through the motions...I dunno the purpose of coming out with the review when it's already the #1 album in the country; just kind of a hip wankfest I guess. The only part of the review that really irked me was bashing Tre and Billie's playing. Who the fuck does that anymore? That's the most hairbrained tactic, and it's pretty uncouth of a P4k reviewer to stoop to the same ideology that some metalhead kid in the 80s would use.And to add to this, this review also shares the "take the lyrics out of context!!1" syndrome that plagues the other negative 21CB reviews. Fun stuff!
Swedish_Idiot Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 If you like a BAD review, this has got to be the worst attack on an album I've ever seen. And The Guardian I think gave the same record 4 stars!http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/12191-...ne-toxic-event/Haha, I remember reading that "review".I love The Airborne Toxic Event.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.