GothicblueCJ
PAPER GOD
Waiting for the Paper Gods!
Posts: 1,581
|
Post by GothicblueCJ on Dec 14, 2010 1:09:11 GMT -5
|
|
rhondar
BIG THING
good times, good times!
Posts: 628
|
Post by rhondar on Dec 14, 2010 1:24:17 GMT -5
What the hell do you have to do to earn 5 stars at Rolling Stone?? I think it's terribly dismissive of this particular critic when they quote the lyric "I should have known when I bought into this dream" to say it's an empty thought. Sadly, that's the way the critics have always been about Duran's albums - which just tells me they still don't quite get it. That's OK, I still love it.
|
|
|
Post by figital on Dec 14, 2010 1:35:24 GMT -5
it sucks that they review the album in less than 100 words. that's a bit of shit as far as i am concerned. i guess 100 words is better than none, but didn't RED CARPET MASSACRE get 3.5 out of 5 in rolling stone as well? i like RCM but this new album is way better than that...it's more coherent, the songs are better written, the production style is better and it surely deserves a better score than it's predecessor.
|
|
|
Post by Tin on Dec 14, 2010 1:37:11 GMT -5
WOW ... better than I thought.
|
|
rhondar
BIG THING
good times, good times!
Posts: 628
|
Post by rhondar on Dec 14, 2010 1:38:40 GMT -5
it sucks that they review the album in less than 100 words. that's a bit of shit as far as i am concerned. i guess 100 words is better than none, but didn't RED CARPET MASSACRE get 3.5 out of 5 in rolling stone as well? i like RCM but this new album is way better than that...it's more coherent, the songs are better written, the production style is better and it surely deserves a better score than it's predecessor. I thought it scored 3.5 as well.....but then again, I'm not a huge fan of Rolling Stone anyway, so I guess I'm not terribly surprised? Annoyed maybe, but surprised..no.
|
|
|
Post by sekret on Dec 14, 2010 1:38:49 GMT -5
3.5 stars is like a 70 in my world , and i'm ok with that !
|
|
|
Post by notoriou5 on Dec 14, 2010 4:07:00 GMT -5
Well if average is 2.5 then its one better than average! That's good when there's only five points up for grabs in the first place!
Rolling Stone are NOTORIOUSLY tight with their marking anyway.
I kind of like it when 'they' don't get it anyway - it makes the album more special to me and I feel isolated, like: am I the only one who gets this, it's cool!
|
|
|
Post by Blank on Dec 14, 2010 4:22:32 GMT -5
"empty thoughts" - reviews don't get better than that!
|
|
kathy
PAPER GOD
.
Posts: 2,794
|
Post by kathy on Dec 14, 2010 4:40:45 GMT -5
Deos AYNIN merit more than a 3.5 rating? In my opinion, it does.
By the same token, however, the fact that this particular critic happens to write for RS doesn't carry any more weight than any other critic's opinion.
At one time, being mentioned in RS and especially, "being on the cover of the RS" really meant something special. But over the years, its lost a lot of that cachet. To me, RS today is just another music magazine.
|
|
|
Post by jo74 on Dec 14, 2010 5:08:53 GMT -5
3.5 is not bad at all. Did they not give 5 stars to U2's 'No Line On The Horizon' which is far from being U2's best album? I am not a big fan of their reviews! It would be more interesting to read the review from Q magazine & Pitchfork..
|
|