Why does the trilogy get so much crap

[peppermint butler]

Exactly. I couldn't have said it better.

When I listen to green day i do it 3 ways. One i listen to all acoustic songs.2 I listen to full albums and 3 I make a set list as if it was a live show.

[TeaWithTheHatter]

When I listen to green day i do it 3 ways. One i listen to all acoustic songs.2 I listen to full albums and 3 I make a set list as if it was a live show.

That's awesome. I never thought of doing it that way. I use Green Day's songs to inspire my art.

[belinda jane]

just a heads up, you probably wanna stay on topic just so the thread doesn't get closed or you get told by mods guys

[peppermint butler]

just a heads up, you probably wanna stay on topic just so the thread doesn't get closed or you get told by mods guys

Thanks for the heads up.

[TeaWithTheHatter]

just a heads up, you probably wanna stay on topic just so the thread doesn't get closed or you get told by mods guys

Sorry about that.

[peppermint butler]

Well anyway. My thoughts are that if you don't like it don't listen to it. I mean there are hundreds of album leaks ion youtube alone yet I still see complains about how they " wasted money" on one of the best albums of 2012

[TeaWithTheHatter]

Well anyway. My thoughts are that if you don't like it don't listen to it. I mean there are hundreds of album leaks ion youtube alone yet I still see complains about how they " wasted money" on one of the best albums of 2012

I see your point.

If you would like to talk more, feel free to PM me.

[peppermint butler]

I see your point.

If you would like to talk more, feel free to PM me.

. Will do. Getting an uno vinyl to.

[TeaWithTheHatter]

. Will do. Getting an uno vinyl to.

Sounds awesome. See, I like the three albums a lot. Like I said, I change like the band does and follow the flow they follow.

[peppermint butler]

Sounds awesome. See, I like the three albums a lot. Like I said, I change like the band does and follow the flow they follow.

very true

[communitykid]

I think they were pretty decent, overall. A few songs really stood out as great new Green Day tracks, but a lot of it gets lost in the shuffle. They could've broken it down and made it one great album with no filler, or two good albums with a little filler, but they made it three decent albums with lots of filler. It's like Green Day had to take a little poop and they squeezed out a big one.

[Virtue]

Probably due to a new change in pace on the style of music. People are used to their older sound (Though I personally would like to see their capabilities of music writing)

You can't really win with this one really. If they made another Rock Opera, People would probably call them out for making the same thing again (See Criticism for 21st Century Breakdown),

but if they experiment with their sound people will go "Oh, They're not as good as they used to be. I like their older stuff better"

[DookieLukie]

Here we go. I'm going to try to be as straightforward and simple as I can on exactly why people do not like the Trilogy, as well as my own personal opinions of the Trilogy.

After using the majority of my free time this summer reading fuming reviews of the Trilogy, both from fans and non fans, I can highlight THREE (count 'em) THREE universal reasons why people hate the Trilogy.

1. The lyrics are too simple. - This I have to agree with. I didn't expect a "back to basics" album Trilogy to be, well, not basic, and I certainly didn't expect the lyrical quality of AI or 21CB, but I did expect a return to the sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek humor that made "Old Green Day" music so fun to listen to. When they talked about sex and drugs and booze...they did it with a sarcastic approach. A friendly gateway, if you will. The Trilogy just sort of leaps out at you with really harsh realities. Drugs..what??? Cheating on wife...WHAT?? And dare I bring up a makeout party of 40yr olds...WHATTT??? Lyrically it takes the seriousness of 21CB and transfers it to the topics of old.

2. The music is too polished. - It's very hard to expect a millionaire band that has access to thousands of dollars worth of equipment to create an album with the sound quality of my cheap guitar plugged into my dumb amp that I bought with my birthday money. That being said, our good pals at Green Day kept promising a raw album. Billie constantly blabs on about a "live sounding album" but continues to make polished records. I don't blame them, but I think the biggest problem is that they didn't do what they claimed to do. Although DOS was pretty raw, in my opinion. But if you play guitar...or bass...etc, you know that different amps/guitars make different sounds. Green Day simply experimented with different sounds. A lot of people just didn't like the more precise, chimey guitar lines.

3. Over saturation (aka...filler) - Green Day fans like to call the Trilogy a lot of filler. (Ironically Shenanigans, rejected filler, is a fan favorite album.) But honestly I think the real issue here lies deeper than a group of GD fans annoyed by filler tracks. This is perhaps the most complicated of my numbered points, so pay attention (please?). See filler for one person is gold for another. This goes for the band and the fans. If you browse the forum threads about the Trilogy, you'll notice that some people pin some songs as filler, and others call those same songs their favorites. This makes it impossible to accurately say which songs are filler. Also, the band thinks this way too. For anyone who has written music, you develop feelings for the songs you create. This is probably why Green Day thought "Oh Love" would be a good 1st single (which is actually was) while many fans hated every note of it. Green Day made this Trilogy for the fans, and therefore wanted to provide a lot of music. Now it gets deep. 21 Guns was technically "filler." The band added it last minute and almost cut the track. It went on to be a huge hit. See if a trashed on filler track had been a hit, no one would call it filler. In fact, if any of the Trilogy songs were promoted/became hits, no one would care about the filler! We'd see it as an epic array of Green Day songs. Basically, lack of hits leads to accusations of "filler."

Now my opinion (if you're still reading). Yes the lyrics are kind of shotty, but this is some of the best GD music I've heard from them. You can bet if the songs were popular, fans and critics would agree. Nuclear Family is a blend of political prowess and layered guitars in a little old school punk nugget. Stay the Night is an anthem of yearning with a live feel. Kill the DJ is something new, a dance pop Clath-style song. Lazy Bones is a full out throttle of rock and sadness. Brutal Love is a old bluesy song that almost has two movements. X-Kid is a call-back to the Green Day of old, with a modern blast of heaviness. Guys this stuff is good. Maybe if it was one album full of hits we'd be impressed. Or maybe the standout songs would become filler. But Green Day gave us a ton of new songs with a lot of cool and unique sounds, and I'd call this a success.

[HARVESTER]

They've been getting so much crap for years. Their music is not crap though.

[petros]

They're really bellow average for the level of other Green Day's albums.For me their worst albums.There are good songs in it but they get lost in the chaos of the average ones.

If it was another band releasing them I would enjoy them more.But for green day i think the whole trilogy is shitty.

I hope for the next album they start doubting theirselves again and create something good like they always did.

[peppermint butler]

Here we go. I'm going to try to be as straightforward and simple as I can on exactly why people do not like the Trilogy, as well as my own personal opinions of the Trilogy.

After using the majority of my free time this summer reading fuming reviews of the Trilogy, both from fans and non fans, I can highlight THREE (count 'em) THREE universal reasons why people hate the Trilogy.

1. The lyrics are too simple. - This I have to agree with. I didn't expect a "back to basics" album Trilogy to be, well, not basic, and I certainly didn't expect the lyrical quality of AI or 21CB, but I did expect a return to the sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek humor that made "Old Green Day" music so fun to listen to. When they talked about sex and drugs and booze...they did it with a sarcastic approach. A friendly gateway, if you will. The Trilogy just sort of leaps out at you with really harsh realities. Drugs..what??? Cheating on wife...WHAT?? And dare I bring up a makeout party of 40yr olds...WHATTT??? Lyrically it takes the seriousness of 21CB and transfers it to the topics of old.

2. The music is too polished. - It's very hard to expect a millionaire band that has access to thousands of dollars worth of equipment to create an album with the sound quality of my cheap guitar plugged into my dumb amp that I bought with my birthday money. That being said, our good pals at Green Day kept promising a raw album. Billie constantly blabs on about a "live sounding album" but continues to make polished records. I don't blame them, but I think the biggest problem is that they didn't do what they claimed to do. Although DOS was pretty raw, in my opinion. But if you play guitar...or bass...etc, you know that different amps/guitars make different sounds. Green Day simply experimented with different sounds. A lot of people just didn't like the more precise, chimey guitar lines.

3. Over saturation (aka...filler) - Green Day fans like to call the Trilogy a lot of filler. (Ironically Shenanigans, rejected filler, is a fan favorite album.) But honestly I think the real issue here lies deeper than a group of GD fans annoyed by filler tracks. This is perhaps the most complicated of my numbered points, so pay attention (please?). See filler for one person is gold for another. This goes for the band and the fans. If you browse the forum threads about the Trilogy, you'll notice that some people pin some songs as filler, and others call those same songs their favorites. This makes it impossible to accurately say which songs are filler. Also, the band thinks this way too. For anyone who has written music, you develop feelings for the songs you create. This is probably why Green Day thought "Oh Love" would be a good 1st single (which is actually was) while many fans hated every note of it. Green Day made this Trilogy for the fans, and therefore wanted to provide a lot of music. Now it gets deep. 21 Guns was technically "filler." The band added it last minute and almost cut the track. It went on to be a huge hit. See if a trashed on filler track had been a hit, no one would call it filler. In fact, if any of the Trilogy songs were promoted/became hits, no one would care about the filler! We'd see it as an epic array of Green Day songs. Basically, lack of hits leads to accusations of "filler."

Now my opinion (if you're still reading). Yes the lyrics are kind of shotty, but this is some of the best GD music I've heard from them. You can bet if the songs were popular, fans and critics would agree. Nuclear Family is a blend of political prowess and layered guitars in a little old school punk nugget. Stay the Night is an anthem of yearning with a live feel. Kill the DJ is something new, a dance pop Clath-style song. Lazy Bones is a full out throttle of rock and sadness. Brutal Love is a old bluesy song that almost has two movements. X-Kid is a call-back to the Green Day of old, with a modern blast of heaviness. Guys this stuff is good. Maybe if it was one album full of hits we'd be impressed. Or maybe the standout songs would become filler. But Green Day gave us a ton of new songs with a lot of cool and unique sounds, and I'd call this a success.

amazing analisys. That hi lights all the reasons * claps hands

They've been getting so much crap for years. Their music is not crap though.

true that

They're really bellow average for the level of other Green Day's albums.For me their worst albums.There are good songs in it but they get lost in the chaos of the average ones.

If it was another band releasing them I would enjoy them more.But for green day i think the whole trilogy is shitty.

I hope for the next album they start doubting theirselves again and creat something good like they always did.

Whatever floats your boat man. Every one is entitled to there own opinion

I think they were pretty decent, overall. A few songs really stood out as great new Green Day tracks, but a lot of it gets lost in the shuffle. They could've broken it down and made it one great album with no filler, or two good albums with a little filler, but they made it three decent albums with lots of filler. It's like Green Day had to take a little poop and they squeezed out a big one.

read dookielukie's analisys. It sums that up perfectly

Probably due to a new change in pace on the style of music. People are used to their older sound (Though I personally would like to see their capabilities of music writing)

You can't really win with this one really. If they made another Rock Opera, People would probably call them out for making the same thing again (See Criticism for 21st Century Breakdown),

but if they experiment with their sound people will go "Oh, They're not as good as they used to be. I like their older stuff better"

your right. Great job.

See I believe people will be ungrateful no matter what they put out. They do not have a perfect album that %100 of people like. As I've said earlier i don't hate any green day songs. Some tracks stand out more than others

[MuricanIDIOT]

The trilogy were Foxboro Hot Tub albums,musically I didn't enjoy it except for stay The night and lazy bones,and lyrically most Of The trilogy made no sense

[peppermint butler]

The trilogy were Foxboro Hot Tub albums,musically I didn't enjoy it except for stay The night and lazy bones,and lyrically most Of The trilogy made no sense

depends on the person really. I understand most of it. Have any questions about lyrics?? Ask away

[Gregorovich]

By modern rock standards, I'd call the trilogy average. By Green Day's standards, I'd call it below average. Of course there are some great songs, and there are very few explicitly 'bad' songs. But there sure are a shitload of boring songs. Almost every single song on the trilogy comprises of a horribly typical four-chord verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus structure. I mean, come on, it's 2013. Green Day proved that they can go beyond predictable four-chord songs in 2004, and again to a much much greater extent in 2009.

The Forgotten in particular is beginning to annoy me; the piano could easily have not only been played, but even composed by someone who had been playing for a few days. The Viva La Glorias are evidence that Billie is in fact a force to be reckoned with on the keys, but The Forgotten does him no justice. Brutal Love and Dirty Rotten Bastards are really the only two songs which depart from this structure, and are thus the two best songs of the trilogy. The one thing I'd say the trilogy does have going for it is the guitar solos. Though even these get tiresome when plastered over three albums' worth of four-chord pop-punk songs.

At the end of the day, it's not the trilogy's quality which annoys me. It's the fact that Green Day have done so much better in the past, musically and lyrically. Comparatively, the guitars are predictable, the bass is constrained, the drums are shoddy and the keys are embarrassingly basic.

[Overjoyyed]

They get slack because

1. They seem like a failure b/c of the lack of promotion which equalled low album sales

2. They came after the epic rock opera album era- which IMO were the best 2 albums they made

3. Billie Joe- the lyric genius- kinda slacked on writing solid lyrics- some of the lines make me shudder.

[ollhjr]

Here we go. I'm going to try to be as straightforward and simple as I can on exactly why people do not like the Trilogy, as well as my own personal opinions of the Trilogy.

After using the majority of my free time this summer reading fuming reviews of the Trilogy, both from fans and non fans, I can highlight THREE (count 'em) THREE universal reasons why people hate the Trilogy.

1. The lyrics are too simple. - This I have to agree with. I didn't expect a "back to basics" album Trilogy to be, well, not basic, and I certainly didn't expect the lyrical quality of AI or 21CB, but I did expect a return to the sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek humor that made "Old Green Day" music so fun to listen to. When they talked about sex and drugs and booze...they did it with a sarcastic approach. A friendly gateway, if you will. The Trilogy just sort of leaps out at you with really harsh realities. Drugs..what??? Cheating on wife...WHAT?? And dare I bring up a makeout party of 40yr olds...WHATTT??? Lyrically it takes the seriousness of 21CB and transfers it to the topics of old.

2. The music is too polished. - It's very hard to expect a millionaire band that has access to thousands of dollars worth of equipment to create an album with the sound quality of my cheap guitar plugged into my dumb amp that I bought with my birthday money. That being said, our good pals at Green Day kept promising a raw album. Billie constantly blabs on about a "live sounding album" but continues to make polished records. I don't blame them, but I think the biggest problem is that they didn't do what they claimed to do. Although DOS was pretty raw, in my opinion. But if you play guitar...or bass...etc, you know that different amps/guitars make different sounds. Green Day simply experimented with different sounds. A lot of people just didn't like the more precise, chimey guitar lines.

3. Over saturation (aka...filler) - Green Day fans like to call the Trilogy a lot of filler. (Ironically Shenanigans, rejected filler, is a fan favorite album.) But honestly I think the real issue here lies deeper than a group of GD fans annoyed by filler tracks. This is perhaps the most complicated of my numbered points, so pay attention (please?). See filler for one person is gold for another. This goes for the band and the fans. If you browse the forum threads about the Trilogy, you'll notice that some people pin some songs as filler, and others call those same songs their favorites. This makes it impossible to accurately say which songs are filler. Also, the band thinks this way too. For anyone who has written music, you develop feelings for the songs you create. This is probably why Green Day thought "Oh Love" would be a good 1st single (which is actually was) while many fans hated every note of it. Green Day made this Trilogy for the fans, and therefore wanted to provide a lot of music. Now it gets deep. 21 Guns was technically "filler." The band added it last minute and almost cut the track. It went on to be a huge hit. See if a trashed on filler track had been a hit, no one would call it filler. In fact, if any of the Trilogy songs were promoted/became hits, no one would care about the filler! We'd see it as an epic array of Green Day songs. Basically, lack of hits leads to accusations of "filler."

Now my opinion (if you're still reading). Yes the lyrics are kind of shotty, but this is some of the best GD music I've heard from them. You can bet if the songs were popular, fans and critics would agree. Nuclear Family is a blend of political prowess and layered guitars in a little old school punk nugget. Stay the Night is an anthem of yearning with a live feel. Kill the DJ is something new, a dance pop Clath-style song. Lazy Bones is a full out throttle of rock and sadness. Brutal Love is a old bluesy song that almost has two movements. X-Kid is a call-back to the Green Day of old, with a modern blast of heaviness. Guys this stuff is good. Maybe if it was one album full of hits we'd be impressed. Or maybe the standout songs would become filler. But Green Day gave us a ton of new songs with a lot of cool and unique sounds, and I'd call this a success.

I couldn't agree more. Although I wasn't a fan yet it reminds me of the reaction of the general public/critic after Warning came out. They had been a band labeled that they could only talk about teenage angst/lust, masturbation, and boredom. Then they drop Warning and people were all like "WTF? Acoustic guitars? Being the minority? Political undertones? It was a shock to the mold people fit them into that it wasn't very successful (Although there were probably a multitude of other reasons for the lack of success). Now for the last ten years or so they have been labeled a political/social band, whether that is a label that is truly warranted or not. I mean in all honesty in American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown have only a couple/few songs each with social/political undertones. When they released the trilogy they went back to the topics you mention: 40 year old makeout parties, killing dj's, etc. (Makeout Party, Fuck Time, Sweet 16, Kill the DJ, etc.). Hey on a side note remember when Cracked.com had an article saying that Green Day had a Yoko Ono problem because of Lady Cobra. LOL!!! So it shattered the mold/box people had put them in for the past decade or so. That probably explains why in almost all the pressers/magazines prior to the trilogy's release asked the band why there was a lack of political songs, especially during the supposed all-important 2012 election cycle. Although in a sense that seems like a cool responsibility being one of the few mainstream bands to tackle political/social issues, I can't blame Billie and the boys wanting to switch gears. I feel if they would've made some political/social commentary album minus the concept record with a supposed storyline they might have gotten away with it. But if there would've been some storyline to it, they would've have gotten a ton of flack for doing the same thing three times in a row. Do I think some of the lyrics are too simple on the trilogy? Yes, but I can't blame them for not wanting to be stuck behind one label, and to be quite honest Billie wrote three albums worth of material that conveys feelings that the general public feels on a daily basis: love, lust, anxiety, depression, nostalgia, etc. If given a chance a lot of people could relate with what was conveyed over the three albums.

I also agree on the over saturation point. Although I see it from the public standpoint as Green Day being pretentious by releasing 37 songs. That they think they are the best band in the world (WHICH THEY ARE AND SHOULD NEVER BE QUESTIONED!!!) and just because of that fact they can release three albums of material all at once and assume a lot of people will buy it or download it illegally. Regardless it was an easy piñata for critics to bust open because it seemed so pretentious and over the top for a band that sees themselves as the best, when according to the critics they clearly aren't. I just wish that modern rock could have a bigger impact so that their music was over saturated on the radio (At this point I want to type out moist for no apparent reason, so there it is. It just feels natural after saying saturation.) and not over saturated because they released three albums.

As much as I like to think that if they would've released a "greatest hits" of trilogy material it would've gotten more critical and mass support, I don't think it would've mattered either way. A compilation potentially could've gotten more critical success (maybe a shot at Grammys, but most likely not), but I still don't think it would've gotten to the mass success that American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown (mostly 21 Guns) received. Trust me we all want that level of success to be achieved once again, including myself, but with the musical landscape as it is there just doesn't seem to be a market right now. Regardless if they released a compilation or the trilogy as is, both would've been like a 21st Century Nimrod: musically all over the place, but a good representation of where the band has been, where it is now, and a preview of things to come. It provided songs that will be staples as a part of their live shows and as a part of my life with songs describing my life as it is now.

[CocaColaX]

Here we go. I'm going to try to be as straightforward and simple as I can on exactly why people do not like the Trilogy, as well as my own personal opinions of the Trilogy.

After using the majority of my free time this summer reading fuming reviews of the Trilogy, both from fans and non fans, I can highlight THREE (count 'em) THREE universal reasons why people hate the Trilogy.

1. The lyrics are too simple. - This I have to agree with. I didn't expect a "back to basics" album Trilogy to be, well, not basic, and I certainly didn't expect the lyrical quality of AI or 21CB, but I did expect a return to the sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek humor that made "Old Green Day" music so fun to listen to. When they talked about sex and drugs and booze...they did it with a sarcastic approach. A friendly gateway, if you will. The Trilogy just sort of leaps out at you with really harsh realities. Drugs..what??? Cheating on wife...WHAT?? And dare I bring up a makeout party of 40yr olds...WHATTT??? Lyrically it takes the seriousness of 21CB and transfers it to the topics of old.

2. The music is too polished. - It's very hard to expect a millionaire band that has access to thousands of dollars worth of equipment to create an album with the sound quality of my cheap guitar plugged into my dumb amp that I bought with my birthday money. That being said, our good pals at Green Day kept promising a raw album. Billie constantly blabs on about a "live sounding album" but continues to make polished records. I don't blame them, but I think the biggest problem is that they didn't do what they claimed to do. Although DOS was pretty raw, in my opinion. But if you play guitar...or bass...etc, you know that different amps/guitars make different sounds. Green Day simply experimented with different sounds. A lot of people just didn't like the more precise, chimey guitar lines.

3. Over saturation (aka...filler) - Green Day fans like to call the Trilogy a lot of filler. (Ironically Shenanigans, rejected filler, is a fan favorite album.) But honestly I think the real issue here lies deeper than a group of GD fans annoyed by filler tracks. This is perhaps the most complicated of my numbered points, so pay attention (please?). See filler for one person is gold for another. This goes for the band and the fans. If you browse the forum threads about the Trilogy, you'll notice that some people pin some songs as filler, and others call those same songs their favorites. This makes it impossible to accurately say which songs are filler. Also, the band thinks this way too. For anyone who has written music, you develop feelings for the songs you create. This is probably why Green Day thought "Oh Love" would be a good 1st single (which is actually was) while many fans hated every note of it. Green Day made this Trilogy for the fans, and therefore wanted to provide a lot of music. Now it gets deep. 21 Guns was technically "filler." The band added it last minute and almost cut the track. It went on to be a huge hit. See if a trashed on filler track had been a hit, no one would call it filler. In fact, if any of the Trilogy songs were promoted/became hits, no one would care about the filler! We'd see it as an epic array of Green Day songs. Basically, lack of hits leads to accusations of "filler."

Now my opinion (if you're still reading). Yes the lyrics are kind of shotty, but this is some of the best GD music I've heard from them. You can bet if the songs were popular, fans and critics would agree. Nuclear Family is a blend of political prowess and layered guitars in a little old school punk nugget. Stay the Night is an anthem of yearning with a live feel. Kill the DJ is something new, a dance pop Clath-style song. Lazy Bones is a full out throttle of rock and sadness. Brutal Love is a old bluesy song that almost has two movements. X-Kid is a call-back to the Green Day of old, with a modern blast of heaviness. Guys this stuff is good. Maybe if it was one album full of hits we'd be impressed. Or maybe the standout songs would become filler. But Green Day gave us a ton of new songs with a lot of cool and unique sounds, and I'd call this a success.

I totally agree with the point about filler, after reading various opinions about "what were the best tracks" on each album. Quite often I would find that my favourites, were others least liked, and other peoples 'best' track, was the one I actually did not like (Makeout Party - I virtually always skip that one). I am glad they did not cut down on the amount of material released because of this, but I do think that it would have been better to do a double/triple album, instead of a staggered release, I think it would have sold more, but that's only my opinion (I think possibly the record company decided it would be more profitable to have three separate releases, although when you think about it, it must have been more expensive to produce three lots of packaging etc, rather than just one). I may be wrong, but I got the opinion that Uno! sold the most and Tre! the least, although it is generally considered the best. (I am assuming it has sold the least, due to the forthcoming Tre/Cuatro release, and I have no idea which way its supposed to be spelt, as there seems to be numerous variations, and although I have the dvd, I can't check it at the moment).

In a way, I can't help thinking about that 'cut scene' from This is 40, where Billie Joe says his problem was that "I actually sell too many records, so I'm trying to change that". For instance, take Kill The DJ, which for the most part is a good song, although totally different to what you would expect from Green Day, how on earth did they expect it to get any airplay ??, I know there was a 'radio friendly' version on the promo single, which could have been added as an 'extra' to the album, to give people a choice, and may have got more play, as why would someone buy an album that does not have the actual track that they heard on the radio on it??? Doesn't make sense to me, but I can see the irony in the song from Green Day's point of view.

As mentioned by a few other posters, I would have to agree that American Idiot and 21st Century Breakdown were way better albums that any of the trilogy, but that does not make the trilogy bad, not by a long way. Some other bands, mentioning no names, you are lucky to get one/two good tracks on an album, so the fact that there may be one/two or even three not so good tracks on one of Green Days albums, still makes them the Best Band around today. It's a shame more people don't realise this !!!!!

[musso_kn]

To put it simply, the trilogy, if judged alone, contains a good standard of music. In comparison to ALL other studio albums by Green Day, however, it pales. The trilogy has some great tracks and some not so great tracks. It's just missing something.

[A song for the lovers]

great albums. not their best but defiantly not their worse

[JOE THE X-KID]

The thing that annoys me is that because of the rehab stint and lack of promotion, the media automatically says oh it's the worst thing green day have ever done. It's not. Yes the trilogy has some weak songs but that's expected of three albums. I don't think the trilogy was meant to be a "take on the world thing" it was more of a back to basics thing mainly for the fans to enjoy.