artuma with the correct rating!
|
| |
'yeah sputnik showed its ugly side itt "
i'm always ugly
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.0
as per usual :]
|
| |
STYE is my favorite In Flames, please prepare the stake and firewood.
|
| |
reroute and colony are my faves
|
| |
Reroute is definitely underrated. And Come Clarity rules agreed.
The only one I don't like is Siren Charms.
|
| |
come clarity is my third favourite, and yeah reroute is sooooo underrated and that sucks. it's like a slightly better come clarity imo.
|
| |
yeah but to the uninitiated sputnik can be a den of wolves lol.
|
| |
It's true. My first list was shit upon without mercy
|
| |
Would a metalhead such as myself enjoy this?
Are the riffs up to snuff?
|
| |
A likely story tbh :x
|
| |
Probably won't be sticking around here. Didn't realize this site was full of snobby douches who leave meaningless criticisms like 'bad review'
"bad review" is such a general and innocuous criticism, so i can only assume you are getting bent out of shape over the fact that it doesn't go into any detail which is probably just as dumb. i wonder what your reaction would be if someone posted "good review". not a lot of thought put into either critique, but they're just opinions...of a review. it's not like they dissed you personally :/
as for the review itself without going into the merits of your particular "style" of review, even as a commentary it goes nowhere and says nothing. the whole thing is essentially you telling the reader that in flames sold out (whatever that means), and some other bands and even a film director(!) did so too in the past. okay thanks.
the grand irony of all this is your critique of the album is about as nuanced as the "bad review" comments in this thread. in fact, i'd go so far and say it's even less so. what even is your stance on this album? is it good? bad? you don't say. that 5, is it supposed to be ironic? the bare minimum a reader expects from a review is to get an idea of whether an album is good or bad, which seems incredibly hard to glean from this brief history lesson that totally can't be found on wikipedia. unless of course the entire premise is that in flames sold out -> therefore this album is bad, which is incredibly flimsy at best.
tl;dr bad review
|
| |
Lol what the hell is this Hawks guy's deal?
|
| |
Forreals
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
Sad thread tbh.
#savehawks
|
| |
Keyblade: Thank you for the detailed response. I'll keep that in mind going forward.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.0
@marina dont go away, Please!
|
| |
Two things:
1) Even if you praise the album's commercial success, what makes it a 5? You could have given something like a 4, signifying that you think of it more than most people do, while still avoiding a scandalous rating that is only meant to get a reaction.
2) Your whole argument of "selling out is good" crumbles under the fact that this isn't the album for which people consider In Flames to have sold out, and neither is it their best-selling album.
|
| |
yeah it's not badly written at all (it could do without those little tangents in those brackets similar to what i'm doing right now), it's just kind of devoid of content. also the opening line is really misleading, i was expecting the rest of the review to explain how the album is a self aware joke but instead talks about how they sold out. maybe that's the joke? that they sold out and they know it, but don't care as they rake in $$. either way it's really hard to tell
|
| |
The rating was sort of supposed to represent the irony I talk about in the album title/lyrics.
It isn't their best selling album now, but it did extremely well at the time. There are certain variables to account for, like sales over period of time. It's unlikely that any recent albums would outsell albums that have been in rotation for decades because they don't have the advantage of time.
And thanks for the feedback peeps. I'm going to try my hand at reviewing an album I like, which I'm sure will go over much better.
|
| |
|
|
