|
Post by vizzle on Mar 27, 2017 16:25:10 GMT
Seriously tho that review is utter bull
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2017 16:47:33 GMT
i'm not trying to sound like a rabid fan, but pitchfork has never been a good site for music reviews, especially for pop artists, so i'm gonna take this review with a grain of salt and move on with my life.
|
|
|
Post by jr on Mar 27, 2017 19:02:22 GMT
FUCK PITCHFORK
|
|
|
Post by champiness on Mar 27, 2017 20:02:16 GMT
The writing's at least pretty good on this one - it's a genuine take, as opposed to the deer-in-the-headlights response of something like the Vroom Vroom review. Katherine St. Asaph - whose thoughts you can probably see developing in this ILX thread - knows her way around a pithy turn of phrase (and seems to keep a running tally of what hit songs any given person has been behind-the-scenes on). But its takeaway that Charli's been marginalized on this release is, frankly, bizarre (especially when it brings up Starrah and Raye blending into "Dreamer" in a similar fashion). It feels weirdly like Katherine's view of the circumstance is that Charli's opted to stop being a person and instead become a masochistic conduit for the pop machine forming around her, which is, like, a neat idea for a short story, but not a very good summation of where Charli XCX is actually at right now. Also, how much have the standards of Jock Jams drifted that the back half of "Blame It On You" qualifies?
|
|
|
Post by champiness on Mar 27, 2017 20:16:04 GMT
Oh, and while I'm here, and since someone brought up Pitchfork not being good at pop reviews, here's my fan-fave Tom Ewing looking over the ways that Katherine and loads of other critics approach reviewing pop music: freakytrigger.co.uk/ft/2015/04/taxonomy-domine/
|
|
|
Post by friopi on Mar 27, 2017 21:08:23 GMT
When that Pitchfork review brought up Britney I really thought they were going to talk about White Roses because I haven't been able to stop imagining it as a Britney song the last few times I've listened to it. The thematic content isn't necessarily very Britney but I can really clearly imagine her vocals on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2017 22:18:00 GMT
The write like that because they know it gets people talking and it generates revenue for the website. And it works magnificently. It's just basic crapitalism.
|
|
|
Post by cheeseburger on Mar 27, 2017 22:26:23 GMT
P4k is still salty PC Music wasn't a huge ironic ruse that they were in all along.
|
|
|
Post by beepbeepletsride on Mar 28, 2017 0:30:16 GMT
More like bitchfork.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2017 0:42:07 GMT
tiny mix tapes is the only review site worth caring for for context: the guy that wrote this interview has to be on fucking dmt Was it champiness ?
|
|
|
Post by champiness on Mar 28, 2017 16:41:30 GMT
If only. Jeffrey seems to have invented a couple different styles of criticism to add that list I posted on the last page, over the span of about a paragraph. Not sure how sustainable any of them are but they're definitely novel.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2017 21:40:58 GMT
|
|
scn
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by scn on Apr 3, 2017 10:42:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by spencerzsz on May 3, 2017 23:15:20 GMT
In the Pitchfork review for Cashmere Cat's new album: Referring to PC Music as the mainstream (as opposed to Cashmere Cat's "underground" appeal HAHA WTF). I hate this literally every single time they come out with a review they have to find a way to burn PC music in a way that is a) inaccurate and b) childish. whatever. bye
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 0:02:33 GMT
Aw, I was hoping that "Flower Drum Song: The Pinball Game" was a real thing because imagine what a banging soundtrack it'd have...
|
|