|
| Headline | Bad album review |
|
Page:
[1] [2] |
| Author | Comment |
Forum guest
Mar-14-2011, 17:36 GMT
Norway
 | http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/03/10/ente
rtainment/doc4d7904eb3ea69059895999.txt
|
| | |
Wambaugh
Mar-14-2011, 18:17 GMT
Unknown
 | I know it´s typical fan behaviour to claim reviewers have got it wrong, but here goes anyway: I don´t think a review which dismisses "Cars Are Cars" or "Pigs, Sheep and Wolves" as bad songs should be taken all that seriously. Both songs contain lyrics that illustrate human behaviour very well. Sure, they´re not the best songs, but lyrically - which is a pretty important part of a singer/songwriter´s song - they are very good songs. If somebody doesn´t appreciate or isn´t interested in the words, then I think much of Paul Simon´s work will pass them by.
I know they´re easy songs to pick off as "filler", one about cars and another about barnyard animals - but they´re not, they´re about human behaviour. You just have to look a little deeper.
Maybe SBOSW is as bad as he claims, but I do think he´s wrong on much other Paul´s other work (Surprise especially). |
| | |
Mimi
Mar-14-2011, 20:56 GMT
Austria
 | Interesting how many words he uses and how few of them talk about the subject matter. Nobody who reads this article knows now, how the album sounds or what to expect musically. The only thing I found out is, that the author of the article does not like it. |
| | |
Forum guest
Mar-14-2011, 20:56 GMT
Unknown
| well, the reader comments about the author of the article are a lot worse than anything the author has to say about Paul. There´s a lot of people going to write reviews of the album, and some are bound to not like it, I guess... |
| | |
Pelle
Mar-14-2011, 21:36 GMT
Sweden
 | Im not even sure he has heard all the songs yet,nothing about the other song who we not heard yet. I think about dazzling blue, Love and blessing, Rewrite, Love is eternal sacred light. |
| | |
Jay
Mar-14-2011, 22:00 GMT
USA - United Staates America
 | It´s fine. Every other review that has come out so far has been extremely positive. So if an amateur writer doesn´t like the album, boo hoo. Everything that comes out gets at least some bad reviews whether it is so beautiful or so what, pardon the pun. All I know is that the title track was incredible, the song the "Afterlife" was thought provoking, "GRFCD" was fun, and the snippets I´ve heard of the other songs sound great. So I´m excited about it. |
| | |
mog
Mar-14-2011, 22:39 GMT
Canada
 | When you read it, it is not that negative. He recognize Simon as one of the few enduring act.
I think he is disappointed because it is not ROTS or Graceland (which could be likely the case!). Something that really shines on its own, that is exceptional and compelling.
Personally, no I don´t expect it to be like Graceland or ROTS, but better than Capeman, YTO and Surprise. We will see... |
| | |
Suzi
Mar-14-2011, 23:35 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| There are always some who don´t like everything. All of the other reviews I´ve read have been good to glowing. |
| | |
Forum guest
Mar-15-2011, 01:30 GMT
United Kingdom
 | It strikes me as a mixed review - not hostile to Paul, but not over-enamoured with the new material, finding it a bit average, and missing both the highs and lows of an album like, say, Hearts And Bones. We´re hoping for better, and think we have heard better in at least some of the songs we have managed to get access to so far. Christmas Day and SBOSW sound pretty good to me, but the Afterlife hasn´t hit any high notes for me yet. I´m hoping the context of the other tracks will make it sound better and maybe it will. The Afterlife seems closer to one of Paul´s rhythm track songs than the return to Old-style lyric and melody writing we were invited to anticipate by the pre-blurb, but maybe that is just me.
To be fair I´ve seldom seen much enthusiasm for either Cars Are Cars or Pigs, Sheep and Wolves on this site or elsewhere as representative of Paul´s higher levels of achievement. The reviewer´s credentials aren´t automatically rendered redundant in declaring these two songs to be weaker than the majority of Paul´s work. And there´s a touch of enthusiasm for the Capeman which suggests at least a working knowledge of the good stuff! |
| | |
Jon
Mar-15-2011, 05:46 GMT
Unknown
| Cars Are Cars is an awful song. It just is. |
| | |
Jay
Mar-15-2011, 06:01 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| @Jon Hahaha I have to say I rarely listen to that song. I like the lyrics though. |
| | |
HÃ¥kan
Mar-15-2011, 16:35 GMT
USA - United Staates America
| I suspect the reviewer´s thoughts about SBOSW is close to how I will feel about it. I base that on how he reviews the latest albums - some good song here and there but also some weaker.
I don´t at all expect a new Graceland. Paul always thinks his latest album is his best just when he is releasing it. I hope it will be better than Surprise - in fact I´m almost sure that I will think that. But that isn´t saying much... |
| | |
mog
Mar-15-2011, 16:40 GMT
Canada
| I like ´Pigs, Sheeps and Wolves´ !
It it a good song ! It is fascinating to hear the rhythm track or groove that forms its spine. Very fancy and sophisticated stuff. But it is a fan song. Nobody except us has heard it.
Cars Are Cars is really a bad song. |
| | |
Forum guest
Mar-16-2011, 00:33 GMT
Unknown
| Hey, I didn´t know that Cars Are Cars is a bad song! I don´t care much for Ace In The Hole and Congratulations, but I can´t say they´re bad song. Don´t know that Paul ever made any really bad songs. |
| | |
Gerard
Mar-16-2011, 01:37 GMT
New Zealand
 | Shouldn´t really expect there to be only glowing reviews.
Personally, I read them for interest, but don´t think they have anymore relevance than my own opinion, and more than likely will have been created with less thought and understanding of the music than anyone who visits this group.
They refer to Graceland and ROTS as the benchmark (plus his earlier 70´s albums), and in the case of ROTS that would still get my vote as his best work.
However, if you look back at the the reviews of Graceland and ROTS they weren´t all glowing positive at all. In the media Graceland was truly overshadowed by an undercurrent that he was a traitor to the cause (ie, breached the cultural boycott) or in some cases that he was out of ideas and had gone out and stolen other peoples/cultures. The real success/acheivement of Graceland is that it´s popularity was from the buying public - I beleive simply because the music was so good and infectious (including the Queen Mother).
ROTS also did not receive all positive reviews. |
| | |
|
Page:
[1] [2]
|