Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah, no.

Album Rating: 5.0

Predestination with Ethan Hawke was pretty good.



Timecrimes is awesome.

Album Rating: 4.5

If you want to see Bruce Willis actually act in a time travel movie, watch 12 Monkeys

Album Rating: 4.5

Looper isn’t actual garbage in the sense that it has no redeeming qualities, but oh my fuck it is so fucking boring, and it takes itself way too seriously.

Album Rating: 4.5

I remember I went to see it with some buddies from work and we were all shocked by how lame it was

Album Rating: 4.5

Yeah it was the peak of "Whoooooa rotten tomatoes said this is perfect so it better blow my fucking mind" and then it was just top tier made-for-tv at best.

Album Rating: 4.5

Is there a better chord progression that Black Hole Sun’s intro?

Album Rating: 5.0

That short intro is amazing agreed.



Hey Pleb, did you change your rating for this one? Could have sworn you had it at a 5 some time ago...

Album Rating: 4.5

I had it at a 3 originally pal, this one was a real slow burn for me.

Album Rating: 5.0

Ah, ok my bad. It really took me some years to realize how amazing this record is too... Glad you enjoy it now, that’s all that matters :]

Album Rating: 5.0

Soundgarden songs are slow burners in general it seems

Album Rating: 5.0

That's interesting cos this is, I think, by far their most immediate album.

Album Rating: 5.0

This is probably true, but still I think it isn't exactly an immediate experience. It's probably their most catchy album though

Album Rating: 5.0

Perhaps it's the length of the album. Cos I remember being immediately smitten by the first 5-6 songs on this and any of them could have been a single. But the album is so long and the back half is definitely more broody so it took me a while to fully digest the whole thing.

Album Rating: 5.0

^ yep, I had the same experience

Album Rating: 5.0

Perhaps it's the length of the album. Cos I remember being immediately smitten by the first 5-6 songs on this and any of them could have been a single. But the album is so long and the back half is definitely more broody so it took me a while to fully digest the whole thing



Wow, exact same man. I liked it all right away, but only loved the first half and played it a lot more. But after a few more thorough spins, I realized the back half was just as strong.

Album Rating: 5.0

Yea, it must be the length and the relatively slow pace of most of the songs. I mean it's 70 minutes long and not samey, but few songs here are actually fast paced

Album Rating: 5.0

On a related tangent, I feel like this is one of the underrated downsides of the end of the vinyl era and the rise of cassettes and CDs. In the 70s and early 80s with the time restrictions imposed by vinyl LPs, albums had to be 45 minutes or less, which meant that the great albums rarely had a chance to lose the listener's interest.



If Superunknown had come out in the 70s the band would have had to release it as two separate albums, each of which would have been instant classics. But being the 70 minute monster that it is you need to give it time to grow.

Album Rating: 5.0

I notice this with Queen's discography. The albums are short and sweet and they released one almost every year in the 70s. Would be nice if it was like that today. Instead most bands can release albums only in 2 or 3 year spans

Album Rating: 5.0

Yeah, I started noticing the same thing with Rush and Van Halen albums. No matter how long the songs Rush wrote, the albums never dragged.

I think the frequency issue has more to do with the music industry. Back then labels required bands to record an album, tour for 6-9 months to support it, then get back into the studio and record another album. Nowadays it simply isn't as lucrative to record so frequently because they don't sell, so the touring cycle tends to last much longer.