Music: Favorite albums lambasted by critics
- Thread starter Sombastate
- Start date
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
- Aug 24, 2011
- 28,738
- 13,745
Sam's Town had bad reviews?? As far as Killers albums go, I liked it a lot
(My previous username was Hot Fuss btw)
(My previous username was Hot Fuss btw)
BonMorrison
Registered User
I love Chinese Democracy and think it was one of the best rock albums that year.
Not sure if this counts because it actually got positive critical reviews when it came out but people like to talk about it like it's a pile of ****.
Not sure if this counts because it actually got positive critical reviews when it came out but people like to talk about it like it's a pile of ****.
Unhealthy Scratch
Auston 4:16
- Mar 15, 2016
- 1,452
- 0
"Wretch" by Kyuss
It's somewhere between the groovy stoner rock they later became known for and a Motorhead-esque balls-to-the-wall punk/metal hybrid. The production isn't great, but the songs are surprisingly very memorable considering it was a bunch of 16-17 year-olds making their first record.
It's somewhere between the groovy stoner rock they later became known for and a Motorhead-esque balls-to-the-wall punk/metal hybrid. The production isn't great, but the songs are surprisingly very memorable considering it was a bunch of 16-17 year-olds making their first record.
Central PA Hawk Fan
Registered User
Yep, I spent a week with that album when it came out and told my friends that it may be even better than the blue album. My view didn't get much support but at least there's been some retroactive redemption!
Sombastate
Registered User
Yeah, originally it was really hated. Just a quick search, Rolling Stone gave it 2 stars, Pitchfork gave it a 5 (out of 10) and Entertainment weekly gave it a C.
Hot Fuss was great, but i honestly think that Sam's Town was the better record.
Sombastate
Registered User
Also:
George Michael- Listen Without Prejudice: Amazing album, critics didn't like it much as the follow up to Faith. I think its WAY better than faith personally.
George Michael- Listen Without Prejudice: Amazing album, critics didn't like it much as the follow up to Faith. I think its WAY better than faith personally.
Central PA Hawk Fan
Registered User
Same, loved it when it came out and didn't understand what people wanted from them. Its nice that everyone came around eventually but I always wonder what their trajectory would have been had that album been a success from the start
Hippasus
1,9,45,165,495,1287,
That was a great review (not the Rolling Stones one). It was multi-angled by focusing on their perception by the music press as well as how Johansen and the rest of the band perceived themselves. I wouldn't have thought perceptions by themselves would be enough to derail a band, but who knows?
PBandJ
If it didn't happen in the 80's, it didn't happen
I don't have the album, but I've heard a couple of the singles and like them well enough. Likely the lack of critical acclaim came from the change in sound of dropping the faux English accent...which apparently came from overuse of autotune.
I stopped reading Rolling Stone about 3-4 years after starting, so I don't know much about how albums I like are reviewed, excepting to say I liked Grant Lee Buffalo and Catherine Wheel in the 90s, two bands who received critical raves that didn't translate into commercial success.
Hippasus
1,9,45,165,495,1287,
Haha okay, I'm confused. I thought you were talking about #126, which sort of read like a review of reviews of that particular album, and that was what I called great. Johansen is mentioned in that review. He was the lead singer of New York Dolls. The review was about the s/t debut album by that band.
I haven't heard any Rush albums, so I can't comment on that.
Shareefruck
Registered User
People always say that like it's a point of pride, but doesn't that just keep you stuck in your own comfort zone? By all means, make up your own mind, but I think impressionability is a good thing too, to a degree. Everything eventually gravitates back to your authentic impressions over time anyways.
I don't hear people argue this very often-- it's always treated like a bad thing.
I don't hear people argue this very often-- it's always treated like a bad thing.
Last edited:
Mount Suribachi
Registered User
Dunno about the States but the critics fawned over it in the UK (and quite rightly - I don't like George Michael or his music, but I have to admit that's a great album)
Sombastate
Registered User
It was poorly received out here because of "Faith." It was a different record than Faith, and critics couldn't handle it in the states for whatever reason.
I consider it his best album.
I rarely pay attention to reviews. I only know 2112 was destroyed at the time because the members of Rush mentioned it in a documentary as to how they thought their careers were over with their 2nd album lol
- Feb 3, 2009
- 18,936
- 5,416
How do you even know where to begin? With the sheer amount of releases and accessibility to almost everything I need a starting point.
Shareefruck
Registered User
Yeah, it's not like we have the luxury to listen to absolutely everything and make up our mind about which are good. You'd miss out on alot just trying stuff based on random whims and instincts. And let's be honest, what ends up happening is, instead of being influenced by critics, you'd just end up influenced by what's marketed and what other people talk about/listen to, which is the same thing, if not worse.
I like keeping an eye out for what critics/criticky people think because if you're going to be influenced by something, it might as well be by people who are actually passionate about the music.
I like keeping an eye out for what critics/criticky people think because if you're going to be influenced by something, it might as well be by people who are actually passionate about the music.
