L P gave it a 10: Critics don't have a clue...that's why they're critics and not musicians. It's their best yet.
Nice LP, wait to stick it to the critics! And then give no explanation as to why it's the best. You must be a musician...
Yannis gave it a 9: Don't let the critics disappoint you. This is an album of great musical depth. Needs some listens to reveal all of its beauty, but then it turns into pure aural pleasure. The guitar work is haunting, the structure of the songs wisely designed. It lacks the spontaneity of "Antics", but then, make no mistake: this is not punk. I would say it is rock near the borders of classical and soundtrack music.
Once again, the critics are disparaged. I always encourage this mentality. And then Yannis tells us that the record is full of "haunting guitar work" and "wisely designed songs" which lack the spontaneity of the previous release. Why give it a 9 if it's not exciting, and sounds exactly like the other releases? Also, it's not punk. It's soundtrack music. That's not a good thing, Yannis.
elmo . gave it a 9: Our love to admire is epic start to finish. Less joy divison than the last two albums and has more to say aswell. Great one!
Awful. They never really sounded like Joy Division anyways. Paul Banks sings like a dead puppet, that's the only decent comparison. Also, horrible review elmo. Great one!
ben f gave it a 10: 3rd masterpiece in a row by the greatest band ever.
Terrible. I can easily list 10 bands that are better than Interpol. Rolling Stones, Joy Division, Beatles, Beach Boys, The Kinks, The Smiths, Radiohead, Bob Marley & the Wailers, Nirvana, The Pixies. That took me one minute. You suck.
Bob B gave it an 8: solid record. streets ahead of antics. indie wankers are full of excrement.
This is a confusing masterpiece. Bob B is truly the Hemingway of meta.critic users. His short, concise, almost heartless words paint a vivid picture. There is honesty here, a cold pop to the nose. The final sentence is a profoundly brilliant mess. I agree with him, indie wankers are indeed full of excrement. But who is he slandering, those who thoughtlessly enjoy the record because it's "indie-sounding", or the wankers who write snarky off-putting reviews only to cast doubt on said record? We'll never know. Bob B, you are sadistic bastard.
Daniel gave it a 10: Round, beautiful short-novel
I can't wait to listen to this round album. It will be awesomely corpulent!
Edward S. gave it a10:
This cd is fucking GREAT, screw all the critics, they like listening to queer shit! Viva Interpol!!!!!!!
Not really sure what to say. Viva Interpol? Interpol may be the least Latin American band in the history of rock and roll, besides the bass player named Carlos. Apparently, critics jam strictly to the Pet Shop Boys, Madonna, Kylie Minogue, Cher and Judas Priest. Thanks for the dirt on the critics, Edward S.
Brandon C. gave it an 8: I don't know what everyone is complaing about, it's an Interpol album. I think every review should just simply say "It sounds like an Interpol album." If you like Interpol you will like this CD. If you don't you won't. Duh.
Great spelling of "complaining", but this is a valid point. Mainly because it lends its agreement to my belief in expectation clouding critic's minds. So, thanks for than confirmation, Brandon, you make me feel self-satisfied.
Dave m. gave it an8:
It's at least an 8 just cause it's Interpol and that fact alone means it s**ts all over 95% of anything out there. Pitchfork are some haters - 6/10? Keep smoking.
Yeah, Pitchforkmedia.com, fuck you! Also, pass that shit that you're smoking. No one likes a bogart, you jonesers.
Sara B. gave it a 10:
A muscular, bipolar stomper of an album.
According to Sara B, this is how the album sounds:
Until next time, RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 comment:
i wish i could poop on interpol. they are the epitome of music that's sucky and for wuss-bags.
you know i speak the truth.
TRUTH!
Post a Comment