|
|
It's that RollingStone one that I always remember. Even though I really don't agree with some of it (notably, the Radiohead comparisions, which haven't been valid since I was still at school) it really summed up the "patchwork quilt" feel of the album, and of course, the "What is actually the point of Muse?" thing.
Pitchforks was actually quite kind though, considering the beatdown they gave Black Holes and Revelations.
|
|
|
Yeah I thought it did well to describe it, or at least for me anyway. The last two sentences are spot on.
And on a personal level(even though it's not exactly right) I loved the Radiohead references purely for the inevitable backlash that follows.
|
|
|
Quote
Pib :
It's that RollingStone one that I always remember. Even though I really don't agree with some of it (notably, the Radiohead comparisions, which haven't been valid since I was still at school) it really summed up the "patchwork quilt" feel of the album, and of course, the "What is actually the point of Muse?" thing.
Pitchforks was actually quite kind though, considering the beatdown they gave Black Holes and Revelations.
Agreed. The RollingStone one really said well what went wrong on that album. That "what's the point of Muse" probably being the biggest summary of a lot of that album.
It actually surprised me Pitchfork rates Black Holes lower than The Resistance, even more when you compare the harshness of the reviews.
|
|
|
They've mellowed over the years and actually turned into a decent site. When Black Holes came out I think they were still going through either their trying to make reviews funny phase, or their talk more about the coffee you were drinking while you were listening to the album phase.
Like when they gave Tool and/or Mars Volta something like a 0.1 out of 10. Ho ho. I don't think either are world beaters but that's just silly.
They're far better now that they actually just review albums properly without such a veil of smuggery.
|
|
|
|
