FabriPav Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Worst act of the year 2013 via NME: The 1975 Pitchfork's verdict? 5.9: http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/18467-the-1975-the-1975/ Higher than both T2L as well as Drones. Ironically reviewed by someone other than Ian Cohen. Not sure what your point is. Does the fact that a reviewer liked something you dislike nullify his opinion? And lol NME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonisdead Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not sure what your point is. Does the fact that a reviewer liked something you dislike nullify his opinion? And lol NME I never said my opinion on The 1975, I was just solidifying LiT's point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alibros Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I don't care about the score or even his negative remarks. I don't even mind the hatred and anger. I am very much angry about most parts of the album as well. But bringing homoeroticism into this is just low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessicaSarahS Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 I don't care about the score or even his negative remarks. I don't even mind the hatred and anger. I am very much angry about most parts of the album as well. But bringing homoeroticism into this is just low. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonisdead Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I don't care about the score or even his negative remarks. I don't even mind the hatred and anger. I am very much angry about most parts of the album as well. But bringing homoeroticism into this is just low. Agreed. Yeah it's crass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kueller Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It is a pretty minor detail I can get over eventually. Issue I've seen with Cohen, without really reading much Pitchfork, is the tendancy to get caught in the little tangents he throws in there as added entertainment. He can be eloquent enough when writing about the music if he stayed on track. The Coldplay one posted earlier was a lot more on point about reviewing the music and I liked it for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Yep I agree with kueller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark_ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 (edited) This is why I like Fantano waiting until the end to post his score (even though I know people just skip to the end or read the description anyways). At least that way you actually have to do something to see it, though, rather than just have it spat out at you with no real context. As for the Pitchfork review: not really sure what the problem is, tbh. It's harsher than I expected it to be, but it's hardly a complete flogging. Is the problem here that they don't align with everyone else's reviews? Or that they don't cater to the same demographic and music tastes as everyone else? It's self-indulgent and wanky, and I would preferred if they were more specific about what they actually liked/disliked on any given song and less Radiohead references, but it's Pitchfork. You expect that. Edited June 9, 2015 by spark_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frozenbanana Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Wasn't really expecting anything else from Pitchfork, so not that fussed. Interesting though that the reviewer claims that Whatever pleasure can be generated from Bellamy’s admirable melodic sense and overblown hooks is negated by Muse’s insistence that they’re profound rather than fun. I always wonder about statements like this. If you really believe Muse are trying foremost to put a message out there with an album such as this, then of course you're gonna find the whole thing a bit ridiculous and cringe-worthy. But I don't really think Matt does actually believe he's "tearing down a power structure" at all. If you listen to him talking about Psycho, all he's talking about is how enjoyable it is to play live, because people go nuts to the cheap riff. The fun's not really taking a back seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 DrownedInSound gives Drones a whopping 4 http://drownedinsound.com/releases/18847/reviews/4149076 Wasn't really expecting anything else from Pitchfork, so not that fussed. Interesting though that the reviewer claims that I always wonder about statements like this. If you really believe Muse are trying foremost to put a message out there with an album such as this, then of course you're gonna find the whole thing a bit ridiculous and cringe-worthy. But I don't really think Matt does actually believe he's "tearing down a power structure" at all. If you listen to him talking about Psycho, all he's talking about is how enjoyable it is to play live, because people go nuts to the cheap riff. The fun's not really taking a back seat. Yeah but this time it's a concept album that is trying to convey serious message that tackles current, important happenings. How could you not believe they're trying foremost to put a message out there with this album? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_Malry Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 (edited) I don't really think Matt does actually believe he's "tearing down a power structure" at all. If you listen to him talking about Psycho, all he's talking about is how enjoyable it is to play live, because people go nuts to the cheap riff. The fun's not really taking a back seat. Agreed. It's not the first time Cohen's written for cheap gags that don't stick. Check out his review of Future of the Left's The Plot Against Common Sense (and Falco's comeback). As he admits, he didn't bother to "listen for nuance". It is there in Muse songs, even if it's unintended. There's so much more to write about. Even if I often disagree with them, Pitchfork reviews usually have more depth than this. Generally they're good at judging an album in the context of a particular scene or ideology. His 2nd Law one was spot on about the album's merits, but he criticised the second half for being too sincere and not bombastic and funny enough. Personally, I think it needs that balance. To borrow his action film comparison, a movie that was a two hour explosion would be tiresome. If anything, I thought that album's biggest failure was in the sequencing. He pretty much makes the same criticism here - that it's humorless - but it's pretty amazing that he takes things like the countdown in The Globalist or the vocals at the start of Dead Inside seriously. There are loads of funny bits on the album. He also wastes the opportunity to talk about the various subtexts in the plot except for that one passing comment. I'd rather they gave it to someone who hates Muse to review than someone who can't really be arsed. This, from DiS, is far more like it: "Here, Bellamy conflates the very real and distressing issue of drone strikes with the dissolution of his relationship with actress Kate Hudson, hand in awkward clammy hand alongside a pummelled-into-submission theme of breaking promise and spirit down into docile regurgitation." Edited June 9, 2015 by Christie_Malry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark_ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 He's consistent with that, though. The things he liked about T2l were the patently, deliberately absurd bits such as Panic Station and Survival, which is exactly the sort of stuff the band has cut out in Drones - so it stands to reason that he'd like this less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_Malry Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I see your point. In being more consistent stylistically, Drones is less absurd overall. But I think the album begs to be scrutinised lyrically. Most reviews I've read have just brushed over that by saying the lyrics are crap. Sure, but why? What are its specific failures and successes? What effects does the plot create? That's why I like that DiS quotation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musekiddo Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not sure if it's been posted yet but someone needs to make Matt Bellamy read this http://www.popmatters.com/review/194205-muse-drones/ Most accurate review I've read so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not sure if it's been posted yet but someone needs to make Matt Bellamy read this http://www.popmatters.com/review/194205-muse-drones/ Most accurate review I've read so far. Not really, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musekiddo Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not really, though. Do elaborate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bumpypotato Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Never listen to pitchfork's rating system. I've seen albums get practically lauded with a 6.5 and heavily criticized with a 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiT Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 So basically Pitchfork implies that every album ever reviewed at their site is better than Drones. You can't say that it is not fuckin bullshit. If someone is not good at his/her job, should be fired. And why the fuck do they give the task to someone who hates that given band the most? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p_of_cydonia Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 The way I see it, it all boils down to whether someone enjoys muse's bombastic prog-ish rock or not. It has been like that probably since Absolution (which btw has a 72/100 metacritic score - not so great). Indie-oriented sites/magazines obviously do not enjoy Muse so much and Drones is definitely not going to change that, however "stripped back" its sound may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark_ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 So basically Pitchfork implies that every album ever reviewed at their site is better than Drones. You can't say that it is not fuckin bullshit. If someone is not good at his/her job, should be fired. And why the fuck do they give the task to someone who hates that given band the most? What on earth? 4.5 is not extremely low for a Pitchfork review. They actually use the entirety of the 10-point scale and have given quite a number of 0.0 reviews. Never listen to pitchfork's rating system. I've seen albums get practically lauded with a 6.5 and heavily criticized with a 7. I read somewhere that the score and the review are done by different people, not sure if it's true, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spark_ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not sure if it's been posted yet but someone needs to make Matt Bellamy read this http://www.popmatters.com/review/194205-muse-drones/ Most accurate review I've read so far. The main thing I'm getting out of this is that the reviewer really, really doesn't like Exo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Do elaborate... I just disagree with some points that he makes, I just can't be bothered to go back through it line by line. Although unrelated to Drones, I will say I highly disagree with his assessment of Exogenesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectrum IV Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I'm going to be extremely disappointed if the next album isn't titled Mu$e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 So basically Pitchfork implies that every album ever reviewed at their site is better than Drones. You can't say that it is not fuckin bullshit. If someone is not good at his/her job, should be fired. And why the fuck do they give the task to someone who hates that given band the most? Good to see you're back to your old habits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kueller Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I think p4k glorifies their numerical rating just to upset people in that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now