|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 5:18:59 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.. I won't hold my breath for a devent review in Q as they notoriously give the band bad reviews, though hey did award them a lifetime achievement back in 2004 3.5 is not bad, it's just the review itself which is very laz journalism. So it appears that critics are reviewing the album as the nine tracks and dismissing the extra four tracks that will appear next year, not sure if that's right as they should review the album as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by secondalibi on Dec 14, 2010 8:58:31 GMT -5
Who cares about reviews anyway?
Reviewers who hate Duran Duran will always give them bad reviews whatever the quality of what is put out there.
NME are the ones I love to hate, they will give the Duran album 2 or 3 out of 10. Just wait for it and how predictably bad it will be. Its funny, I had a friend who used to write reviews for the NME about 7 years ago and he left because the reviewers were told who should get good reviews and who should get bad ones!! This process also involved writing full reviews for albums they hadn't actually heard!??! NME is all fake, its totally irrelevant and pointless.
- G.
|
|
|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 9:14:17 GMT -5
Who cares about reviews anyway? Reviewers who hate Duran Duran will always give them bad reviews whatever the quality of what is put out there. NME are the ones I love to hate, they will give the Duran album 2 or 3 out of 10. Just wait for it and how predictably bad it will be. Its funny, I had a friend who used to write reviews for the NME about 7 years ago and he left because the reviewers were told who should get good reviews and who should get bad ones!! This process also involved writing full reviews for albums they hadn't actually heard!??! NME is all fake, its totally irrelevant and pointless. - G. NME dissspared up its own arse some time around the mid 90' when ''Brit Pop' was huge and they would put anyone for eg ''Menswear'' on the front and call them the ''Next Big Thing'' thats their favorite headline. The Bravery were front page darlings back in 2005, then they release their follow up and get a lousy review and are never heard of again in the paper. Then they enjoy knocking the same band down normally within a matter of months, its so full of shit!!! I used to buy NME and Melody Maker religiously years ago, but I wouldn't even bother to flick through a copy in the newsstands at my local supermarket now!! They never liked Duran Duran back in the early 80's they aint going to start liking them now..
|
|
|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 9:27:58 GMT -5
Rio also got shitty reviews in 1982. I know, I have the original copy of NME and Melody Maker which include the ''Duran Duran'' & ''Rio'' album reviews, both are not very complimentay. At least you could count on Smash Hits to be somewhat more on the side of the band. ''New Romantic' was not held in very high regard with the old rock guard jounolists and a few bands got slaughterd for what they say as poncy synth music by men in make up LOL Funnily enough, I think ''Seven & The Ragged Tiger'' got better reviews from the music pess at the time, I remember buying a copy of NME in January 1984 where they had put Simon Le Bon on the front cover and done an article about the xmas concerts. Duran Duran and Culture Club,had both played in late December and the paper was doing a full review, and they said that Duran Duran were the far superiour act live!! I had attended 3 nights on that UK tour in December 83 and they were and remain amongst the best Duran Duran shows I have see. The show I saw in San Diego in April 84 on the last night of the whole world tour probablly stands out the most as it was just MAD and the girls were crazzzzy specially for a 16 old boy from London LOL
|
|
|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 9:33:41 GMT -5
I know, I have the original copy of NME and Melody Maker which include the ''Duran Duran'' & ''Rio'' album reviews, both are not very complimentay.
At least you could count on Smash Hits to be somewhat more on the side of the band.
''New Romantic' was not held in very high regard with the old rock guard jounolists and a few bands got slaughterd for what they regarded as poncy synth music by men in make up LOL
Funnily enough, I think ''Seven & The Ragged Tiger'' got better reviews from the music pess at the time,
I remember buying a copy of NME in January 1984 where they had put Simon Le Bon on the front cover and done an article about the xmas concerts.
Duran Duran and Culture Club,had both played in late December and the paper was doing a full review, and they said that Duran Duran were the far superiour act live!!
I had attended 3 nights on that UK tour in December 83 and they were and remain amongst the best Duran Duran shows I have see.
The show I saw in San Diego in April 84 on the last night of the whole world tour probablly stands out the most as it was just MAD and the girls were crazzzzy specially for a 16 old boy from London LOL
|
|
|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 9:35:59 GMT -5
They are. Culture Club is lame! ;D It was hardly a fair fight was it LOL....''Culture Club'' were nothing like Duran Duan, other than both were very popular at the time. Even spandau ballet were not like Duran Duran...they were more like dodgy second car salesmen from Essex in kilts ;D I saw Culture Club in concert, I think it was around Xmas 84, whole areas of seats were left empty and Boy Geroge made a comment about those not coming missing a great show! They were ok for what they were, still better and more original than anything we have around today in the pop field, but to compare them to Duran Duran was odd because musically the bands couldn't be more different.
|
|
|
Post by durandrum on Dec 14, 2010 9:45:10 GMT -5
My dog makes better music than Spandau Ballet. This much is true. Aside from their first album I have never liked thier music, sure they were the house band at the ''Blitz' club in London in the early New Romantic days, but they lacked Duran Duran's finesse and art school side, plus they didn't rock nearly half as much as DD did live or on record.
|
|
|
Post by stuporfly on Dec 14, 2010 9:58:35 GMT -5
I actually did want to pound Rolling Stone's Kurt Loder into dust after reading his wildly unflattering review of Seven & the Ragged Tiger way back in the day. I should add that I was an overly-sensitive kid in my early teens at the time, and it was mostly a visceral response that I didn't even back up by writing an angry letter to the magazine.
Over the years my stance softened a bit, and I realized that I didn't always have to like what critics had to say. Even though I'm a critic myself now, I find myself frequently disagreeing with the opinions of my fellow music hacks, but I also realize it's really not that big a deal.
If you don't agree with what a critic said about your favorite artist, so what? Why does it even matter to you?
In an amusing postscript, my dislike for Kurt Loder only magnified when he tried to ply his trade as a serious journo for MTV. I finally got my "revenge" of sorts years later when a friend and I were shopping at the now shuttered Tower Records on Broadway near NYU. We spotted Loder on the opposite side of a row of CD's and muttered loudly enough to be heard: "Hey, there's that Justin Beiber Fan Kurt Loder...Let's get him!" Loder sprinted out of the store and we shared a good laugh while we continued shopping.
|
|
|
Post by tjuulsgaard on Dec 14, 2010 10:52:18 GMT -5
I think the problem with bad reviews is that its closes doors. Mouth to mouth can only do so much for the band - many of the reviews are read by many people who maybe aren't into DD, maybe they remember them from the "past", but if the review doesn't make them want to have a listen then nothing is gained. Good reviews can sell records - maybe a bad review doesn't mean so much to me, you or anyone else on this board - but that is because we buy the record and make up our own mind regardless of whatever.
Non-fans needs incentive to at least have a listen to it, or look it up on youtube.
|
|
norig
RIO
Shadow on the vine.
Posts: 233
|
Post by norig on Dec 14, 2010 10:55:22 GMT -5
They suck! How can you review an album with less than a 100 words and just pick one line out of the entire record as reflective of it. What I found to be empty was the review!
|
|