Album Rating: 3.5 | Sound Off

i haven't read reviews for this album anywhere else so i didn't think about if it was plagiarized or whatever, and i thought he explained the general criticism everyone has with it pretty well.

This review isn't that bad, but it is a tad ranty.

i honestly don't think it's that bad either. i feel unsatisfied by the end of it but there are worse reviews that people think are good

like my reviews?

Album Rating: 1.5

awesome in that it basically just compiles a bunch of criticisms said by other people into one review

This Message Edited On 06.29.08

Album Rating: 3.5

A well written review. However, I don't think this is all that bad... I think I'll vote positive.



btw- high five! we both gave patd' first album a 5

Album Rating: 1.5

*high five back*



Hell yeah I'm still addicted to that album. One day I plan to write a review justifying my 5, but not for a while. No more Fueled by Ramen reviews for a little bit.

Album Rating: 3.5

Lol, I would like to write a review for it as well, but I'll get destroyed by a bunch of haters for no reason. You know everyone on the hate wagon would neg it and post gay comments.

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

Haha, my justification of Fever being a 5 was one of the first reviews I ever did.

Album Rating: 1.5

^ to matt Psh yeah I got over caring about that though. One day they're gonna look back (most of them are in their mid-teens) and regret the fact that they missed out on all the fun everyone else was having blasting awesome pop-punk albums outside their windows during summer cruises while they sat in their basement listening to br00tal death metal that "takes actual talent" to play. I mean, can't you do a little of both?



But that's their problem, not mine, and I think I will do a decent job of summarizing why it truly is a classic album. Just gotta let the fallout after my CIWWAF review go down a bit first, lol.This Message Edited On 06.30.08

Album Rating: 3.5

^lol, word. I don't know maybe I will review it as well, I'd like to.



To Atavan: You're review was amazing and still two people negged it.

Album Rating: 1.5

Atavan-- Just read that review. Pretty wicked-awesome job. I might not even write mine now cuz I dunno if my ideas are different enough/add anything.



And the fact that you got negged proves that this site really does have some jerks on it. So I would have thought you of all people would have understood my frustration with that.This Message Edited On 06.30.08

There's a time for every type of music, well most genres anyway.

Pop punk is perfect for summer and is filled with people blasting it, but it's not always the best of the genre that gets attention and that's the pop-punk that reaches Fuse (not mentioning MTV because there really is no music there anymore) or the radio, so it gets a bad reputation.
This Message Edited On 06.30.08

Album Rating: 1.5

^I'll agree there's a lot of sh*tty pop punk out there. No doubt about it. It's way overcrowded with derivative, boring bands with nothing to add. Kind of like todays metal scene. Only not as bad tbh.

Well I was reading an interview with Greg from The Dillinger Escape Plan today and he was talking about how Metal-core is now like Nu-Metal with all the bands copying bands that copied other bands.

So Pop Punk can be thrown into that category now, but in a few years it will surely be a exhausted genre.

Album Rating: 1.5

^Na dude, pop-punk will never be totally "exhausted," I don't think. I would have agreed about two years ago. But it seems every year a new facet is opened up in the pop-punk world, a new spin on it, a new attitude to it. It almost isn't even a subgenre anymore, just a regular old genre. It will go through phases of less popular/more popular but it has been here in different forms for almost two decades now, and I think it's just too enjoyable/able to transform for it to just exhaust its self so's to speak.

I guess I can agree with that. Pop, in general, is very manipulatable and is probably one of the easiest to expand upon when it comes to genres, so yeah, that part of your argument I can understand.

This Message Edited On 06.30.08

Album Rating: 1.5

Exactly. I mean there's really only three criteria you MUST have to be a pop-punk band: catchy and basic punk riffs, a fast-ish tempo, and a lead singer that is considered by his/her opposite sex to be extremely hot.This Message Edited On 06.30.08

Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

I understand why people negged the review- it does seem fairly fanboyish looking at it now. I can't help that, though, I just love this band.