Fun Stuff > BAND

what the hell is wrong with pitchfork

(1/10) > >>

FreshJive787:
i really hate pitchfork, my friend brought this to my attention.

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/38447/Justin_Timberlake_FutureSex_LoveSounds

8.1 for a fucking justin timberlake CD? they gave ratatat worse, i really hate their editors.

so question, does anyone even care what pitchfork has to say anymore?

nuisance:
Don't even look at the ratings, the editors have said long ago they treat them as a joke and encourage their reviewers to do the same.

That review of the Timberlake album is great, IMO: really descriptive, well-informed, and passionate.  Did you think it was badly written?  What would you prefer to see in a review?

I should say upfront that Tim Finney's one of my favourite writers on the web, I'm glad he's stepped beyond his blog into some paid (I guess) gigs.  I don't always agree with his opinions, but he's exciting to read... and, to be honest, I'd definitely rate the new Timberlake album more highly than stuff like Ratatat.

I also really respect the editors for apparently broadening the remit of the site.  Things like those "month in dancehall" and "month in dubstep" columns are really good ideas, IMO.  

All that said, I probably only take a look at Pitchfork every 6 months, because its main focus is still American indie, which I largely don't give a shit about.

ALoveSupreme:
They also gave the Destiny's Child Greatest Hits CD a great review.  Pitchfork is ridiculous and if you really take it seriously, there's something wrong.

That being said I love Justin Timberlake and have yet to hear the new album.

Skittish:
You realize a pop album can be good, right?

I'm more disappointed at the Black Keys (6.0) review.

Inlander:
Another month, another Pitchfork-bashing thread.  Managed to work Justin Timberlake in there, too.  GET OVER IT, PEOPLE.  PLEASE.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page