M!ke Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 1 minute ago, Octodad said: Yeah currently number one song on alternative radio. Future looks pretty bleak. All the casual fans are loving it on reddit. Still selling out venues. Don't know how they'll be able to go on at this rate. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisions Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 I'm not really talking about popularity, I just don't know where they will go next after seeing the mixed reactions to this album. I'd like to think they don't just try and write the biggest hits possible but also try to satisfy themselves creatively, but that seems to be a Untitled-inspired pipe dream at this point. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpen5311 Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 5 minutes ago, decisions said: Opinions are pointless because this guy didn't like the album? Also a vast majority of the comments on my review are pretty negative, and I even see a mixed reaction in YT comments on the new songs. A lot of hardcore Blink fans really don't like this album it seems. I really don't know what Blink's future looks like... no no no lol I'm not one to bash a review because it was negative. I'm saying if some people go to a site for reviews to base their opinion on something, say AV club, but a different person writes the reviews - it doesn't make sense to me. Like I understand if you go by the opinion of one guy you relate too, but the former seems like a waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M!ke Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 Just now, decisions said: I'm not really talking about popularity, I just don't know where they will go next after seeing the mixed reactions to this album. I'd like to think they don't just try and write the biggest hits possible but also try to satisfy themselves creatively, but that seems to be a Untitled-inspired pipe dream at this point. I believe they'll try and tackle that kind of sound again. But obviously they had to play it safe with Skiba just joining the band. They had to regain some sort of foothold before they could just go off and come back with another experimental album. I mean, I'm sure the next album will be very similar to this one just utilizing songs from these sessions both with and before Feldman, but after that album, I suspect they may try and do something different and experimental again. I hope they get to that point again. But for now, I'll definitely enjoy this music for what it is, cuz no doubt that it is still great, fun, catchy music. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
decisions Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 Just now, Cpen5311 said: no no no lol I'm not one to bash a review because it was negative. I'm saying if some people go to a site for reviews to base their opinion on something, say AV club, but a different person writes the reviews - it doesn't make sense to me. Like I understand if you go by the opinion of one guy you relate too, but the former seems like a waste. Didn't really get that from your last post, but I agree with this. I hate when people try and pretend that all the reviews from a certain publication comes from the same mind, like "ugh IGN gave COD a 9 but Halo an 8.5, even though Halo has X, Y, and Z that COD doesn't what a shit website !111", but really, two different people wrote those reviews so no shit they don't review bases off the same ideas. People act like many publications are simply giant hiveminds, and rarely come up with legitimate criticisms of reviews, probably because they have a hard time accepting that someone disagrees with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octodad Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 3 minutes ago, decisions said: I'm not really talking about popularity, I just don't know where they will go next after seeing the mixed reactions to this album. I'd like to think they don't just try and write the biggest hits possible but also try to satisfy themselves creatively, but that seems to be a Untitled-inspired pipe dream at this point. Tons of blink albums got mixed reviews and aince they haven't released an album in 5 years the reviews will only be more harsh because of growing expectations. The point is their 'future' was never more bleak than it was when Tom was in the band and they weren't releasing anything / canceling entire tours. Now they have some mainstream success again and people generally like the album. The next album could honestly go in any direction so it's hard to even look that far ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpen5311 Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 Just now, decisions said: Didn't really get that from your last post, but I agree with this. I hate when people try and pretend that all the reviews from a certain publication comes from the same mind, like "ugh IGN gave COD a 9 but Halo an 8.5, even though Halo has X, Y, and Z that COD doesn't what a shit website !111", but really, two different people wrote those reviews so no shit they don't review bases off the same ideas. People act like many publications are simply giant hiveminds, and rarely come up with legitimate criticisms of reviews, probably because they have a hard time accepting that someone disagrees with them. That's what I meant, yeah. Sorry I didn't explain my self better. I went off the post I quoted about having no consistency. Like I understand say If you go by a movie reviewer - example roger ebert (rip) because you can agree with his views and thoughts on the subject matter. But when someone goes by a website where there are numerous people and no same hivemind within that site... Makes no sense. But then again, what does make sense on the internet lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M!ke Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 9 minutes ago, decisions said: Didn't really get that from your last post, but I agree with this. I hate when people try and pretend that all the reviews from a certain publication comes from the same mind, like "ugh IGN gave COD a 9 but Halo an 8.5, even though Halo has X, Y, and Z that COD doesn't what a shit website !111", but really, two different people wrote those reviews so no shit they don't review bases off the same ideas. People act like many publications are simply giant hiveminds, and rarely come up with legitimate criticisms of reviews, probably because they have a hard time accepting that someone disagrees with them. Well this is the issue. I've read from a lot of places that have mentioned that they're considering getting rid of numbered rankings because they're so flawed to begin with, this is the number score from one person while representing an entire organization, yet everyone else at that organization may greatly disagree with the person that reviewed the work in question. I love to go to Kotaku for my video game reviews, because they don't assign number or letter grades, but rather just recommend whether or not you should play the game and explain who they think the game would be for, that's the reality of what you should be looking at. Did you know that a C- from The AV Club translates to a 42 on Metacritic? This is another issue entirely, but still related, letter grades are not meant to be given a simple number tied to it like that, because Metacritic weighs all the letter grades evenly, even though most of us grew up where anything less than 60% was an F. Don't know about you, but I've never had a single class where if I got a 42% that was considered a C-, that was an F all the time. And I really doubt the person reviewing this album intended to give the album a failing grade, if they did, they'd have given it an F I would think. So consequently letter grades alter what the overall Metacrtic score is too. The whole system is just fucked by being so inconsistent. Again, that's why I like what an organization like Kotaku does with their reviews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Kyle_ Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 Is it that hard to take it for what it is? The guy said the album is average, so in his opinion it's average. This takes into account that he's or she's probably heard the back catalogue and that's all their needs to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSandt Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 C should be 70-79. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 On 1/7/2016 at 11:31 PM, M!ke said: Well this is the issue. I've read from a lot of places that have mentioned that they're considering getting rid of numbered rankings because they're so flawed to begin with, this is the number score from one person while representing an entire organization, yet everyone else at that organization may greatly disagree with the person that reviewed the work in question. I love to go to Kotaku for my video game reviews, because they don't assign number or letter grades, but rather just recommend whether or not you should play the game and explain who they think the game would be for, that's the reality of what you should be looking at. Did you know that a C- from The AV Club translates to a 42 on Metacritic? This is another issue entirely, but still related, letter grades are not meant to be given a simple number tied to it like that, because Metacritic weighs all the letter grades evenly, even though most of us grew up where anything less than 60% was an F. Don't know about you, but I've never had a single class where if I got a 42% that was considered a C-, that was an F all the time. And I really doubt the person reviewing this album intended to give the album a failing grade, if they did, they'd have given it an F I would think. So consequently letter grades alter what the overall Metacrtic score is too. The whole system is just fucked by being so inconsistent. Again, that's why I like what an organization like Kotaku does with their reviews. This. I hate ratings. I like to make a comment on the album, knowing that there's an individual behind that review. But I hate ratings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrganGrinderX182 Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 http://www.spin.com/2016/06/review-blink-182-california/?utm_source=spinfacebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=spinfacebook Spin trashes the new blink AND plus 44. Fuck them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotNow Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 20 minutes ago, OrganGrinderX182 said: http://www.spin.com/2016/06/review-blink-182-california/?utm_source=spinfacebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=spinfacebook Spin trashes the new blink AND plus 44. Fuck them I mean all of their criticisms are pretty much the same as what many have here, they're just way more harsh in their explanation of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theedge00 Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Eh while I agree with the guy, he sounds like an absolute douche nozzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott. Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Who the fuck are spin? Never heard of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Kyle_ Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxelder Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 here's a couple more reviews from various places (surprisingly, pitchfork) http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/22080-california/ http://consequenceofsound.net/2016/07/album-review-blink-182-california/ http://www.knoxnews.com/entertainment/columnists/chuck-campbell/music-review-blink-182-sounds-compromised-on-california-369d1d5b-5606-21be-e053-0100007f1fa7-385583611.html http://theyoungfolks.com/music/album-review-blink-182-california/82282 http://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2016/07/05/blink-182-california-album-review/ http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life/music/album-review-california-marks-a-gloriously-sunny-return-for-blink-182 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Kyle_ Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 Pitchfork giving it a 5.5 is so totally insane, I don't know what to make of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Kyle_ Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 http://www.metacritic.com/music/california/blink-182/critic-reviews It might be their worst reviewed studio album so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxelder Posted July 6, 2016 Report Share Posted July 6, 2016 pitchfork kinda just does its own thing though, i was truly expecting a 1.0 lol. i think it's fairly hip to like blink-182 right now so, thus, a mildly positive review Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.