Re: Sweetest Thing Review
Robbie Robinson ([email protected])
Tue, 03 Nov 1998 16:04:40 -0800
ajebec wrote:
>
> In light of all the wonderful reviews from various publications around
> the world that people have been posting, I thought it was time to
> balance things up a bit. This is taken from 'revolver', a free
> music/arts newspaper published weekly in Sydney (which is generally
> quite excellent):
>
> U2
> The Sweetest Thing
> This is errky. To paraphrase Regurgitator - I like their later middle
> period stuff better than their new material from their early middle
> period stuff (?) Truly this is the sweetest thing I have heard for a
> while, but you know too much sugar can rot your teeth. And as for the
> constant interruptions from that boy vocal group singing the refrain,
> blech! What's the matter do they have writer's block? This also
> includes two live recordings from 1981 that I think they were very brave
> to release.
>
> Now, remember, before you start flaming me, these are not my words and I
> already know that the writer is misinformed, has no taste, probably
> loves the Spice Girls, etc. etc... Just thought peolpe might get a
> chuckle.
>
> Adrian
No flames.
Just as a warning to any reader of these handouts
anywhere that haven't alread noticed...
These weekly freebies are well know for having
mostly desperate or bitter people doing their reviewing for them.
Bitter because they can't get a real writting job and/or desperate
to get noticed by somebody (maybe a real newspaper that will
hire them) so they will write nasty reviews about albums, singles
or movies that everybody else likes to get noticed. I've seen it
so much here that I've come to expect it. Besides, he's right,that
didn't sound like a *real* review written by a good, knowlegable
writer, now did it?
Robbie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Wed Nov 04 1998 - 15:12:07 PST