I'm not a huge fan of the pop-punk-emo-screamo scene (well, almost not a fan AT ALL), whatever you want to label it. But MCR's new cd is extremely addictive, and a step foward that will hopefully change the "scene" that they've been attached to, because they're doing something exciting.. Also, it has gotten fairly high acclaim here on metacritic.
But what about you guys?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: MJ88,
Posts: 198 | Location: los angeles | Registered: 04 October 2005
Garbage with a capital G. Right up there with Good Charlotte, New Found Glory, and Justin Timberlake. Pure corporate sh!t. I still can't believe they received a metascore of 78. I lost a lot of respect for Metacritic after that one.
Originally posted by hudson: Garbage with a capital G.
garbaGe?
quote:
I still can't believe they received a metascore of 78. I lost a lot of respect for Metacritic after that one.
Umm...You do realize Metacritic just compiles the score based on the reviews of other publications, right? They don't actually review the album themselves.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5265 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Originally posted by ericg75: Umm...You do realize Metacritic just compiles the score based on the reviews of other publications, right? They don't actually review the album themselves.
Aw cmon erig, you can't tell me that metacritic didn't add a little of their special sauce or x-factor or whatever they use to boost metascores for, say, perhaps monetary reasons.
Did pitchfork rate the album? If pitchfork rates it and gives it a good score, then I can see keeping the metascore high. If pitchfork doesn't rate the new mcr, then I think metacritic should factor a zero into the album's score.
Why not hold all bands reviewed on Metacritic to the same standard? If my morning jacket is subject to pitchfork and the other indie critics, why shouldn't mcr? If the indie critics reviewed or even gave a crap about the new mcr, they'd tear apart.
Originally posted by hudson: Aw cmon erig, you can't tell me that metacritic didn't add a little of their special sauce or x-factor or whatever they use to boost metascores for, say, perhaps monetary reasons.
Hmm. This is a new one. You may seriously want to look into tin foil helmet.
Ali Farka Toure must've really dished out some serious cash for his 94.
quote:
Why not hold all bands reviewed on Metacritic to the same standard? If my morning jacket is subject to pitchfork and the other indie critics, why shouldn't mcr? If the indie critics reviewed or even gave a crap about the new mcr, they'd tear apart.
So because a couple review sources you deem credible didn't review the album, Metacritic shouldn't list the album on their site?
I'm pretty sure p4k (or cmg, or tmt) is free to review the album and trash it. I don't think Metacritic would withold that rating just to keep the metascore high. I know of no case where that has happened.
quote:
Did pitchfork rate the album? If pitchfork rates it and gives it a good score, then I can see keeping the metascore high. If pitchfork doesn't rate the new mcr, then I think metacritic should factor a zero into the album's score.
If you're that concerned what Pitchfork thinks, read Pitchfork and don't worry about metascores.
BTW, Pitchfork gave one of the albums tracks 4 stars in their track reviews section the other day. Take that however you want.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: EricG75,
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5265 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Originally posted by ericg75: Hmm. This is a new one. You may seriously want to look into tin foil helmet.
Ali Farka Toure must've really dished out some serious cash for his 94.
I think toure's score is more credible since his album was subjected to the reviews of the more intelligent and stringent critics. Besides, Toure doesn't have any money or a big label. MCR does. Hm, makes you wonder.
I'll look into that p4k review of the song. Word on the metacritic street is, those guys at pitchfork sold out to the man. Something about a kelly clarkson review or something. I forget which teen pop album it was.
Originally posted by hudson: I'll look into that p4k review of the song. Word on the metacritic street is, those guys at pitchfork sold out to the man.
I believe the street you're referring to is Filmore Mescalito Holmes Blvd. Beware, it's in a shady part of town.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5265 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Originally Posted by hudson: Garbage with a capital G. Right up there with Good Charlotte, New Found Glory, and Justin Timberlake. Pure corporate sh!t. [...] I certainly hope you're not going to suggest I actually listen to mcr's new album.
...
Do I even need to add anything to this?
For the record, I picked the album up the other day based on a lot of very good reviews, but haven't had the chance to listen to it yet. But the point is that I will actually bother listening to it before I assume it's trash. I'm not into emo and I didn't even like MCR's second album that much, but when so many people come out and say "I hate emo, but I loved this" it's difficult to not be interested. Maybe you should give this a chance instead of condemning it offhand?
By the way, they suck live. At least the videos I saw a few years ago did. I would never judge an album's quality by live performances.
Originally posted by hudson: Did pitchfork rate the album? If pitchfork rates it and gives it a good score, then I can see keeping the metascore high. If pitchfork doesn't rate the new mcr, then I think metacritic should factor a zero into the album's score.
'Cause liking something because Pitchfork hates it (and vice versa) is totally cool. And Metascores should really just be dependent on what Pitchfork thinks.
Also, you say MCR is garbage (which I don't think anyone's really going to argue with), and then you say that you listen to Evanescense (which is the same thing except with a girl as the lead singer, and probably considerably worse) to be "open-minded".
Ths mightn't be the most gracious way to return after a few weeks of absense and several months of only sporadic posting, but you are an idiot, really.
Anyway, I'll give MCR credit where it's due and admit that they had at least part of a good song in "Welcome to the Black Parade". The first half of it, at least, was sort of pleasant.
Posts: 688 | Location: Adelaide, South Australia | Registered: 01 January 2005
Also, you say MCR is garbage (which I don't think anyone's really going to argue with)
I'd argue with it. I like some of their stuff, especially from their first album.
I'm not sure why they get trashed so bad. They're by far one of the most interesting bands to make it "big" for a while. It's not like they're some manufactured band either. They came up through Eyeball records with hard work and a different sound. Plus they're actually trying to evolve their music instead of just releasing the same shit so they can stay popular (like Nickleback for example.) I think they at least deserve a little credit. It gets a lot worse then My Chemical Romance.
Posts: 1376 | Location: Valparaiso, IN | Registered: 01 July 2006
I certainly hope you're not going to suggest I actually listen to mcr's new album.
Forgive me. I wasn't aware you could tell if something is garbage or not before you even listen to it. My bad.
I may try that for my top 20 list at the end of the year. I won't bother listening to any records. I'll just make a list of records I think would be considered cool in wannabe hipster circles.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5265 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
I may try that for my top 20 list at the end of the year. I won't bother listening to any records. I'll just make a list of records I think would be considered cool in wannabe hipster circles.
That wouldn't be the first time that's happened.
"Naked Woman, Naked Man Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
Posts: 12874 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004
I'm pretty sure I've officially "gone indie" when I consider pretty much everything mainstream to be "too poppy", but honestly, is there a better way to describe The Black Parade? It's pop. It's too overproduced to have that three chord punk charm and too underproduced to be interesting. It's like Kid A and Amnesiac don't even exist for MCR. A hint for the band: it's perfectly OK to go a bit electronic! Would a synth riff or sample here and there hurt so much? A guitar with more or less than the requisite amount of distortion? A - *gasp* - Fuzz Bass?!? But no...
It's not a dark album, mainly because the riffs are just too happy, the production too lavish and lush. It may be about cancer and death, but you wouldn't know it if you weren't paying attention to the lyrics. The first time I heard "Welcome to the Black Parade" on the radio, I actually thought it was Jimmy Eat World or a similarly happy, upbeat/inspirational group. These songs just don't get anywhere near grim enough to be taken seriously by me.
Another thing is that basically every song is the same. You have the infinitely traditional and now thoroughly boring pop-punk instrumentation -- lead guitar, chunky rhythm guitar and plain bass with some unspectacular drumming in back, with a few touches of strings, piano, etc. Basically nothing you haven't heard before on literally every pop-punk record. Even the vocals are bland, layered on so thickly that they basically sound like every other pop-punk band out there. I liked just one song on the CD, and that was the hidden track "Blood" at the end, mostly because it was a slightly humorous, tongue-in-cheek approach to the whole Cancer/death/depression idea. The Black Parade is, when you get right down to it, an attempt to sound as normal as possible; thus by trying to broaden the scope of their music to others, they've merely made it meaningless and empty. This is a band that has nothing left to say, and an album with only one aspiration: to sell. Don't buy this record. Buy Black Holes and Revelations by Muse. Buy OK Computer, Kid A and Amnesiac. Buy Return to Cookie Mountain by TV On The Radio. Heck, buy American Idiot, buy anything that sounds more interesting than this. But don't pay for this garbage.
1/10
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dork,
Wow, it's been a little while since a thread was so enjoyable to read. Oh Hudson...you're not going to win this one by any stretch. Likely the reason you haven't responded again. That was hilarious. You have rendered any points you make meaningless. Hilarious.
EricG75, I don't know you, but I like you. Nice work, that was funny and you hit the nail right on the head. Kudos.
As far as the Black Parade, I haven't heard it. I will volunteer that when I heard the single, I noticed it. That says a lot to me. Most popular music drifts by my ears without registering. I thought that the song is a bit different than what we've been hearing in pop music lately. So, I will give them some props. They made an attempt to be different than their peers. I think they are popular enough that they would be successful no matter what they release...so I don't consider it to be a sellout...or a ripoff. I'm not going to go buy the album, but I certainly wouldn't condemn someone for being a fan.
I think people who think popular music can't be good are dead wrong and narrow minded. There are many exceptions to be made. What did Gershwin say when he introduced Brian Wilson on CBS? Something along the lines of...95% of popular music isn't worth a damn, but the other 5% is some of the most fresh and exciting music there is.
I agree completely.
Posts: 751 | Location: Nova Scotia | Registered: 31 May 2006