Album Rating: 4.2

Colton is such a fucking moron lmao.

Album Rating: 3.0

how the hell would i know that drifter

Album Rating: 3.0

hawks i click on your page and there is a rating for a band called Vomitrocious. I click on your page and see that

Album Rating: 4.2

Colton I click on your page and there is a rating for a band called Tomato Flower.

Album Rating: 3.0

yeah it wasn’t good. i saw someone compare it to Sweet Trip and I genuinely can’t fathom how anyone can think that

Album Rating: 3.0

anyway check Cameron Winter - Heavy Metal

Album Rating: 4.5

Vomitrocious rule

Album Rating: 3.0

best metal band name is Infant Annihilator. makes me laugh whenever I think about it

Album Rating: 3.5

Oh I agree there are subtle changes album to album, but fanboys talked about them like Help and Abbey Road aren't both the same band at their core, just one is a more developed version of the core sound that they've always had. Abbey Road is a good album, with stuff that may have been lost in translation from when it came out to now clouding my vision.

I just don't understand how someone can say Help is terrible in comparison like the people who were telling me that, it's a bit less developed but they're still the Beatles and they still had their trademarks on it. They all have that catchy Beatles flair that made them who they are. Even if I'm not the biggest fan. It's just that I don't see why people HATE the early work compared to those years. They've stayed a lot more consistent than people give them credit for. The way they explain it you'd think it was a Swans level reinvention

Album Rating: 3.0

ok if you listen to A Hard Day’s Night and then The White Album and you think it’s just a subtle progression of the same core sound then the metalcore has done irreparable damage to your brain

Album Rating: 3.5

There are things that sound nothing alike (see: Revolution 9, Helter Skelter) but a GOOD chunk of it is still catchy pop rock at its core. Again, people act like it was like a whole entirely new band, but White Album still had shit like Sexy Sadie.

Album Rating: 3.0

Sexy Sadie sounds nothing like anything from their early career. why is that the track you would highlight to make this point

Album Rating: 3.5

idk it's pretty much pop rock with simplistic (i don't really mind it, but it's funny that people talk so much shit about simple lyrics in modern music like these don't exist) lyrics like that Queen song about wanting to ride a bike that would've been shit on if it happened in 2012-2013 when all those boomer memes about "WHAT HAPPEN TO REAL MUSIC" got big. my point is more that you can still tell it's the Beatles, the way they speak of later vs earlier you'd think later was completely unrecognizable to fans of earlier.

Side note: Imagine isn't far off in quality to most prime Beatles work, so I don't get why it's not even close to as loved. Also i don't really blame you for not knowing bc I don't really talk about being a she as much as I should.

Album Rating: 3.0

even when disingenuously presented in the most reductive way humanly possible, your argument isn’t even close to accurate, unless it’s hinged on the completely arbitrary notion that their later music is literally unrecognizable from their early work, as in, you cannot tell it was made by the same band (nobody has ever said this, but it’s still true for many of their songs)

Album Rating: 3.5

that's the way the distinction was told to me when i started trying to get into them forever ago, but i'll give you that it's likely on me for interpreting things incorrectly (that happens a lot) and it led to unreasonable expectations, but i will say if there is any beatles album with potential to get up to a 5 for me, it'd have to be abbey road, i understand the hype but i feel disconnected from it, very likely mostly due to upbringing and not having much exposure as a young child

i don't know how much more i'd enjoy the work separated from that distinction, but it did seem like people used extremely hyperbolic ways of explaining it and I took it completely literally. all i know is i refuse to be one of those lewronggeneration weirdos, and i'm actively trying to avoid becoming someone who stops exploring new styles

lil bitch really gonna kick the page off with > i click on your page and there is a rating for a band called Vomitrocious. I click on your page and see that
and end it with >even when disingenuously presented in the most reductive way humanly possible

"people used extremely hyperbolic ways of explaining it and I took it completely literally"
people have never stopped saying stupid shit about the beatles (both pro and anti) since they first formed — they're still a great band if you ignore this and use your ears and brain in the ways nature intended
you don't even have to view their stylistic journey favourably - plenty of cultural appropriation gaffes and silly studio experiments along the way, plus McCartney's descent into oldworld bs - but there is no tenable angle for denying its existence. read five minutes' worth of material on their changing approach to production if you need idiotproof substance to how they functionally became a different band

Album Rating: 3.5

Colton listen to Empty by Janet jackson

Album Rating: 1.5

Just don't interact with that bitter basement dweller.

Album Rating: 5.0

@jurtz: Too ambiguous!!!

Album Rating: 1.5

I'm Dutch, I say the things as they are (: