Album Rating: 4.5 | Sound Off

toxin why do you have this as a 1?

i skimmed the tinymixtapes review and agreed with it so my purview is even more limited than yours 8) 8)

"okay alex I meant more that critics tend to bite their tongues (lol rolling stones' "revised" review on Pinkerton) on what would later be seen as classic and/or revolutionary."

this is true, i guess, but idk if i would want to chalk it up to that, just cuz you could say this about any middling review of an album you like i think

Album Rating: 5.0

i think the main problem is that the critics on a lot of these mainstream sites are just not that well versed in music as a whole. I get the vibe that a lot of them are *just* good writers and that is all. it's like the editor goes hey mr good writer, listen to this... without his/her team completely grasping the fundamentals of whatever it is they're even writing about. in the end they dont give a shit cause they're getting paid to write.



whereas a place like sputnik has a bunch of people that are passionate about the music they understand for the most part. and we dont even get paid. so a lot of reviews turn out to be well studied/researched... whereas our mainstream/ paid counterparts will just pencil whip it, get their paycheck, and be done.

Album Rating: 4.0

I read some of the "weaker" reviews on this album, and they just sound like rants on track length,

"not a pop" format, lack of substance, lack of direction or cringeworthy lyrics. Some of them don't

even review the music..



Also, fuck the haters.. This is probably one of the few "pop" album I like



Edit: Soby nailed it.

Album Rating: 5.0

@munsu yes exactly. they pick up on some superficial bullshit and say nothing of true critical merit

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

@iljajlm long story dw it'll change tomorrow most likely



"idk if i would want to chalk it up to that, just cuz you could say this about any middling review of an album you like i think"



well yeah and no, I guess the difference is that JT, as an established pop star, seems to be pushing boundaries in an era where not many pop stars want to (of the ones who recently have made great albums, how many were household names before? kanye---and look at the reception to his music). Then there's the obvious nature of song lengths which make it obvious this deserves to be seen at from a scope beyond your typical pop-music lenses.



I skimmed tinymixtapes and I can acknowledge the argument has a legitimate premise which boils down to opinion (that the songs' length are more bloated than a sign of something revolutionary) and that's how a negative review for this album should be approached imo.

Album Rating: 4.5

The lyrics are somewhat laughable at times though but they don't really detract from the overall experience for me

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

Sobhi better summed up what I wanted to say.

Sobhi nailed it

"i think the main problem is that the critics on a lot of these mainstream sites are just not that well versed in music as a whole. I get the vibe that a lot of them are *just* good writers and that is all. it's like the editor goes hey mr good writer, listen to this... without his/her team completely grasping the fundamentals of whatever it is they're even writing about. in the end they dont give a shit cause they're getting paid to write."

thats ok i guess but...instead of a broad swipe i'd be interested to hear your problems with the reviews--from tinymixtapes or popmatters or whatever. this might not be the forum for that but, as with toxin., i'm not sure i want our engagement with publications/reviews we disagree with to be sorta huge ideological blankets we can sorta muffle them with rather than, like, criticisms of what they say/how they say it. though maybe this is just because i do not like this album all that much and i am being touchy

Album Rating: 5.0

i only read the guardian's so far (which is idiotic), and am basing my rant on ratings alone. i feel like giving this anything less than a 60% is a bit crazy and really calls into question a base knowledge of R&B. I'll have to actually read the negative reviews, and i absolutely have blinders on to an extent.

Album Rating: 4.5

Dear Alex, I really think you should unleash your insights and thinking processes in the form of blog posts instead of wasting them in some thread



js

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

"i'm not sure i want our engagement with publications/reviews we disagree with to be sorta huge

ideological blankets we can sorta muffle them with rather than, like, criticisms of what they

say/how they say it."



But the huge "ideological blankets" are based upon (generalized) "criticisms of what they say/how

they say it" though like I said my scope here is limited to now four reviews. I mean read the

PopMatters review and tell me he doesn't miss the point completely. The author spends the entire

time explaining how songs are ridiculous and don't work because of the lyrics, as if that's the

singular defining quality of what makes this album great or not great.



I could probably pick apart the review more (like it laughably talking about the actual music on

FutureLove yet just barely mentioning it on here) but it misses the mark so completely that it's

unnecessary.

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

sobhi read popmatters, I'd love to see what you think about it.



http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/169442-justin-timberlake-the-2020-experience/



2/5 (40%) my ass

"i feel like giving this anything less than a 60% is a bit crazy and really calls into question a base knowledge of R&B. I'll have to actually read the negative reviews, and i absolutely have blinders on to an extent."

sobhi i gotta tell you, this made me cringe

maybe i've been so inundated into the School of Subjectivity that i also have blinders on to equal yours but the idea that an album is barred from negative ratings past a certain point (that these critics must hold their personal opinions subservient to whatever forward-thinking cultural force this album apparently represents) because it is too revolutionary--and this is the assumption i am working off, that you think "a base knowledge of r&b" would lead them inevitably to this conclusion--is silly to me. especially so given the album came out so recently, definitely way too soon to be making judgments about its apparently "revolutionary" nature and also because i really don't get how this album is all that revolutionary, though i have not yet read your review and maybe that will clear things up.

i definitely think it is possible to have a base, even a deep, appreciation for r&b and just not like this album very much. i am certain i know a few people who fit into that category, although this site's populace wouldn't indicate as much

that was probably way too long. i'll go read your review now

Album Rating: 4.0

Then there's the obvious nature of song lengths which make it obvious this deserves to be seen at from a scope beyond your typical pop-music lenses.

Album Rating: 5.0

But what surprises the most is how utterly underwhelming it is in terms of actual substance.







did popmatters actually listen to the album

Album Rating: 4.5

"http://www.popmatters.com/pm/review/169442-justin-timberlake-the-2020-experience/"



I feel like the reviewer said a lot without actually saying anything

also the second half of "strawberry bubblegum"'s melody sorta sounds like a song i wrote last year but never did anything with so fuck that

Album Rating: 4.0 | Sound Off

Because the fact that there are "5 or 6 freakin verse/chorus parts before doing anything different" (which incidentally concedes that it does do something different---wasn't this my point) is something you'll never see in other pop albums, and as such you should take into consideration that this isn't just some other pop album.



It doesn't mean you have to hail it as revolutionary---one review Alex posted that's negative does a good job talking about these song lengths---but if you spend 90% of your review explaining why the lyrics are bad, aren't you just missing the point a little?