A Friendly Correction for those Man-Haters who Delve to be Single

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3305

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3306

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3307

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3308

TM

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

O.K., I have already admitted that I read Pitchfork. Ha ha ha, I'm played out, wheee! Anyhoo, I think the best Pitchfork reviews are the ones where the reviewer seems personally offended by very existence of the album:

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/20421-wilder-mind/

The satellite radio station I listen to the most has declared this week Mumford and Sons week for the release of this album. I've fled, but occasionally forget (I hate the local programming on my NPR affiliate) and switch back. It's painful. And somewhat surprising, because I really liked both the solo work and the New Basement Tapes stuff.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

O.K., I have already admitted that I read Pitchfork. Ha ha ha, I'm played out, wheee! Anyhoo, I think the best Pitchfork reviews are the ones where the reviewer seems personally offended by very existence of the album:

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/20421-wilder-mind/

Smug pretentious reviewers should not be allowed to review pop stuff. Of course this reviewer hates it, because the mob likes it.

The old movie reviewer from DC's City Paper gave me that hard rule for reviewers.

The guy would review Almador (or whatever his name is) movies then do a Tom Hanks Rom-Com, and it would be the same tone.

Like "the new Tom Hanks movie isn't completely horrible, like X, but it really has far less redeeming value than even the insipid y."

What he was missing was that people read his reviews to decide whether to go see the new movies, not to fucking analyze them. And if the reader had listened to the reviewer he would never have gone to see X or Y.

Jesus, Flower you know this. And what the fuck are you doing even reading a Mumford and son review. Fuck sakes, what is happening to you?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3309

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3310

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3311

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...postcount=3312

TM

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Smug pretentious reviewers should not be allowed to review pop stuff. Of course this reviewer hates it, because the mob likes it.

The old movie reviewer from DC's City Paper gave me that hard rule for reviewers.

The guy would review Almador (or whatever his name is) movies then do a Tom Hanks Rom-Com, and it would be the same tone.

Like "the new Tom Hanks movie isn't completely horrible, like X, but it really has far less redeeming value than even the insipid y."

What he was missing was that people read his reviews to decide whether to go see the new movies, not to fucking analyze them. And if the reader had listened to the reviewer he would never have gone to see X or Y.

Jesus, Flower you know this. And what the fuck are you doing even reading a Mumford and son review. Fuck sakes, what is happening to you?

Pitchfork does five reviews a day, and gives teasers for each review. When I see a teaser that says, "Mumford & Sons has successfully created perhaps the most adequate commercial rock album of 2015," I click through knowing there may be some good reading there. I guess I also did not even know that Mumford & Sons are loved by the masses and critically reviled. Are they critically reviled? Is it just Pitchfork? I don't even know that. I think part of the reason is that Mumford & Sons, much like Death Cab for Cutie and Better Than Ezra, have picked a name so bad, it ensures that I will never be able to actually focus on their music. This is true even though I saw them (and don't recall thinking they were detestable) in that movie Big Easy Express, which I mostly enjoyed. You pick a bad band name and you're dead to me. My new band is going to be called #FuckYou.

[Flinty_McFlint]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Pitchfork does five reviews a day, and gives teasers for each review. When I see a teaser that says, "Mumford & Sons has successfully created perhaps the most adequate commercial rock album of 2015," I click through knowing there may be some good reading there. I guess I also did not even know that Mumford & Sons are loved by the masses and critically reviled. Are they critically reviled? Is it just Pitchfork? I don't even know that. I think part of the reason is that Mumford & Sons, much like Death Cab for Cutie and Better Than Ezra, have picked a name so bad, it ensures that I will never be able to actually focus on their music. This is true even though I saw them (and don't recall thinking they were detestable) in that movie Big Easy Express, which I mostly enjoyed. You pick a bad band name and you're dead to me. My new band is going to be called #FuckYou.

I liked Mumford & Sons. Except when Redd was making fun of Pat Morita's accent. That wasn't cool Redd/Fred.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Pitchfork does five reviews a day, and gives teasers for each review. When I see a teaser that says, "Mumford & Sons has successfully created perhaps the most adequate commercial rock album of 2015," I click through knowing there may be some good reading there. I guess I also did not even know that Mumford & Sons are loved by the masses and critically reviled. Are they critically reviled? Is it just Pitchfork? I don't even know that. I think part of the reason is that Mumford & Sons, much like Death Cab for Cutie and Better Than Ezra, have picked a name so bad, it ensures that I will never be able to actually focus on their music. This is true even though I saw them (and don't recall thinking they were detestable) in that movie Big Easy Express, which I mostly enjoyed. You pick a bad band name and you're dead to me. My new band is going to be called #FuckYou.

In my first novel I created a band where the lead singer had a goal of making cutting political commentary, the band was named "Swing to the Left." Get it?

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Pitchfork does five reviews a day, and gives teasers for each review. When I see a teaser that says, "Mumford & Sons has successfully created perhaps the most adequate commercial rock album of 2015," I click through knowing there may be some good reading there. I guess I also did not even know that Mumford & Sons are loved by the masses and critically reviled. Are they critically reviled? Is it just Pitchfork? I don't even know that. I think part of the reason is that Mumford & Sons, much like Death Cab for Cutie and Better Than Ezra, have picked a name so bad, it ensures that I will never be able to actually focus on their music. This is true even though I saw them (and don't recall thinking they were detestable) in that movie Big Easy Express, which I mostly enjoyed. You pick a bad band name and you're dead to me. My new band is going to be called #FuckYou.

I know you will always have a place in your heart for both the Blowjob Camels and my more experimental side project, Attican Bedshitter.

I just bought tickets for a My Morning Jacket show. It hurt a bit, but they are really good live.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Flinty_McFlint

I liked Mumford & Sons. Except when Redd was making fun of Pat Morita's accent. That wasn't cool Redd/Fred.

I think you have to white -- deeply, severely, hopelessly white -- to like Mumford & Sons.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Naked, of course.

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...972#post495972

TM

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I think you have to white -- deeply, severely, hopelessly white -- to like Mumford & Sons.

I do not like Mumford & Sons, so while that may be a necessary quality, it is not a sufficient one.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Naked, of course.

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...972#post495972

TM

Whenever I see her with clothes on I'm surprised. I am NOT complaining - it just seems like her natural state is naked.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I think you have to white -- deeply, severely, hopelessly white -- to like Mumford & Sons.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I think you have to white -- deeply, severely, hopelessly white -- to like Mumford & Sons.

It's just Brits trying to do Americana. I like Americana. Wilco. Avett Bros. The Band. Son Volt. Townes Van Zandt. Bob Fucking Dylan.

Former FB critical choices Neko Case and the Decemberists.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

I think you have to white -- deeply, severely, hopelessly white -- to like Mumford & Sons.

I dunno. I liked the first two albums, and as stated before, I liked his solo work and I really like his work on the New Basement Tapes. I'm not white.

ETA: Graham's white, midwestern brother-in-law is a huge top 40 pop fan (I don't think I'd ever really hung out with one until I met him), and he HATES Mumford & Sons on the basis that no banjo should hit the top ten. His loathing may be a reason that Graham and I liked them.