Album Rating: 3.0
Well I remember when I first came here he wrote reviews and they were actually quite good. Now he just comes back with a new s/n every so often and makes dumb jokes.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
nvm read more and it got worse
on a purely objective basis it’s hard to find marked distinctions in any of the songs
how can you say it's objectively hard to find marked distinctions, makes no sense, read a dicitonary noob
|
| |
comment tilt: high
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
[quote=Coke]first paragraph was bad so i stopped there.[/quote]
It's not just because you disagreed with it? Is it? ;)
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Uh oh...do I dectect...that cocaine might...actually be...
butthurt!?!?
|
| |
dont get him started
|
| |
how can you say it's objectively hard to find marked distinctions, makes no sense, read a dicitonary noob
I know that this is your usual way of critiquing other people's opinions, but I'd rather you focus on the points I try to make instead of dwelling on prose that doesn't agree with you. The only person's comments I was planning on replying to were yours, so please at least give me that much respect and don't act like a douche.
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
The album’s misplaced technicality aside
how can technicality be misplaced? i sure hope they find it though
Distinguishing between the songs is nigh impossible
did you just write "nigh impossible"?
disjointed and illogical musical ideas are linked together with absurd technical wankery that most probably makes your average fifteen year old explode in his jeans, but leaves vast quantities to be desired on a compositional level.
nice sentence, not. illogical musical ideas? the stuff about exploding in jeans is horribly forced and doesn't fit your setnence, and the way you end the sentence is lulzy. You could have wrote I DONT LIKE THIS YOU DO PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME and it would have done the same.
This is a result of the band’s complete rejection of memorable song-writing
again, awful word choice. rejection implies it was intended. if you're saying the songwriting is lax, that's totally cool. but if you're saying it, you're failing, because you're pushing your opinion into fabricated intentions by the band.
completely out of place and twenty-years-too-late melody
yeah this sounds great when you read it until you realize it doesn't make any sense
unbearable falsetto
very little falsetto on this album bro almost all full voice
it’s obvious his growls, which on the odd occasion sound pretty impressive, are forcefully manufactured
what
Along with his forgettable vocal performance
so forgettable you can't help but ramble on incessantly about it
the album’s concept plays its part.
no concept on fortress dingbat
I’m sure many an opinion has been given regarding Fortress’s concept
there isn't one
I often wonder if my sentiments regarding this album are misplaced
did you check your shoe? i know when i misplace my technicality it's usually in my shoe
unmemorable vocals
again, you're so desperate for attention you dont even realize what words you're using
sorry man review was awful. you don't have to like the album but you could try to come off a little less desperate for attention next time.This Message Edited On 01.31.09
|
| |
rasputin614 (3:59:54 PM): the silence is him going through my review and finding every single sentence he thinks doesn't make sense, which he plans to compile in a huge comment and offer to me as proof that my opinion is wrong
rasputin614 (4:00:03 PM): and when he does that, i;m going to post this part of the convo and lulz will ensue
zoo (4:00:24 PM): lol
zoo (4:00:25 PM): right
zoo (4:00:36 PM): i figured he'd be doing something like that
zoo (4:00:51 PM): i'd post that now actuallyThis Message Edited On 01.31.09
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
you asked
|
| |
lulz
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
im going to go finish my beer it's nigh impossible to imagine me letting it warm
oh no i misplaced it
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Crikey...
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
LMAO, hey that's me
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
cool im going to send a bunch of gayporn to your email now ZOOYORKERThis Message Edited On 01.31.09
|
| |
All the things you mentioned are again particulars regarding my writing. To be very honest, a lot of my writing has been styled from reading your reviews, so I find it hard to believe that you so avidly reject it. You just poke fun things like the word unmemorable not working or technicality can't be misplaced, when you know jsut as well as I do that that doesn't really bear any relevance to anything, it's just the way I've chosen to express myself. I hardly see how this is being desperate for attention.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Oh man, I WAS listening to some Zimmer's Hole but this is FAR more entertaining.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.5
ROAR!!!
|
| |
Album Rating: 2.5
I see this is taking off nicely but will this be able to compete with the Wintersun thread?!
|
| |
Album Rating: 4.5
seriously though 'rasputin' i get what you're trying to say and it'd work a lot better if you used words you understood and wrote this like less of a self-righteous jackass. or one of the two. i mean, the album is ridiculously overthetop and the songwriting can easily be seen as haphazard (though I don't see it like that). But you can't go on saying the band "rejects memorable songwriting" because that's like me saying you intentionally use words you don't understand. the fact that you follow your review with a comment effectively calling everyone who likes this album out saying you "wont defend yourself" just says that you're expecting to have to. If you're going to draw this much attention to yourself, rather than let the review speak for itself, then there's your problem. And no, Angel, I'm not going to turn this into a huge fuffle, I just think a lot of his word choices are lazy and intentionally "controversial" just for the sake of drawing attention to the review.This Message Edited On 01.31.09
|
| |
|
|
