Jump to content
IGNORED

The Quietus review the new Coldplay album, they don't like it


MadameChaos

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest Gary C

Can't stand people that censor swearwords. Just don't bother swearing if you haven't got the temerity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is if they want to get credibility they shouldn't be reviewing anything by such a bunch of nobodies in the first place. Reviewing it and then going all Angry Video Game Nerd on it is pretty juvenile.

Or they could make a point about the semiotics of polite blandness in contemporary society or in contemporary Britain. Or about how Coldplay are a decent band but how that's almost a bad thing, about trying to think exactly what's so infuriating about them (and I think there are good reasons to slag them off besides rarrr they're boring fuck chris martin). They could even publish a sociological profile of archetypical Coldplay listeners.

maybe even take a step forward and publish a new list of excommunications including radiohead's the bends

 

anyway, viva la vida was unforgivable, that waooOOooOoOh and those strings should be banished from existence, even the title itself is pretty embarrassing

i refuse to willingly listen to any coldplay

 

also the first time i heard them was in a barclays commercial, says it all really

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't stand people that censor swearwords. Just don't bother swearing if you haven't got the temerity.

I thought I was the only person that was irked by this ridiculous custom that people seem to have.

 

People that replace "fuck" with "eff", "bastard" with "bee", etc... need to either grow some balls and say what they really want to say, or find a word that they're not afraid of saying in front of people and use that instead.

 

Implying swearing, without actually swearing, is rather silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gary C

 

Can't stand people that censor swearwords. Just don't bother swearing if you haven't got the temerity.

I thought I was the only person that was irked by this ridiculous custom that people seem to have.

 

People that replace "fuck" with "eff", "bastard" with "bee", etc... need to either grow some balls and say what they really want to say, or find a word that they're not afraid of saying in front of people and use that instead.

 

Implying swearing, without actually swearing, is rather silly.

 

Absolutely agree. I used to work with someone who would gleefully say things like "eff them" and "eff that" in the office.

 

It was as though they were implanting the swearword in my head, passive aggressively, which I feel is actually far more emotionally harassing than just fucking swearing. If you're going to be taboo, just do it. Don't force my brain to do the translation for you. Because that's all it is. Everyone that hears "eff that" translates it to themselves. Fuck that, it's worse than just swearing. At least you can use the emotional impact and shock if you actually swear.

 

See you next Tuesday, is the same thing.

 

If you feel strongly enough about something to swear then do it. If you don't feel like you can swear in a certain situation but still want to express yourself passionately then read a book, write your thoughts down and find a way to communicate more effectively.

 

And I can only assume that the editor at the Quietus decided that an article like that wouldn't be very Google-friendly if it was 40% swearwords. But there's clearly a line there that they didn't feel comfortable crossing. You either choose to swear or not. Don't fuck around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Can't stand people that censor swearwords. Just don't bother swearing if you haven't got the temerity.

I thought I was the only person that was irked by this ridiculous custom that people seem to have.

 

People that replace "fuck" with "eff", "bastard" with "bee", etc... need to either grow some balls and say what they really want to say, or find a word that they're not afraid of saying in front of people and use that instead.

 

Implying swearing, without actually swearing, is rather silly.

 

Absolutely agree. I used to work with someone who would gleefully say things like "eff them" and "eff that" in the office.

 

It was as though they were implanting the swearword in my head, passive aggressively, which I feel is actually far more emotionally harassing than just fucking swearing. If you're going to be taboo, just do it. Don't force my brain to do the translation for you. Because that's all it is. Everyone that hears "eff that" translates it to themselves. Fuck that, it's worse than just swearing. At least you can use the emotional impact and shock if you actually swear.

 

See you next Tuesday, is the same thing.

 

If you feel strongly enough about something to swear then do it. If you don't feel like you can swear in a certain situation but still want to express yourself passionately then read a book, write your thoughts down and find a way to communicate more effectively.

 

And I can only assume that the editor at the Quietus decided that an article like that wouldn't be very Google-friendly if it was 40% swearwords. But there's clearly a line there that they didn't feel comfortable crossing. You either choose to swear or not. Don't fuck around.

 

:beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to work with someone who would gleefully say things like "eff them" and "eff that" in the office.

 

It was as though they were implanting the swearword in my head, passive aggressively, which I feel is actually far more emotionally harassing than just fucking swearing. If you're going to be taboo, just do it. Don't force my brain to do the translation for you. Because that's all it is. Everyone that hears "eff that" translates it to themselves. Fuck that, it's worse than just swearing. At least you can use the emotional impact and shock if you actually swear.

I take it you've seen the Louis CK thing about this:

 

NSFW language .....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This review is subjective. Reviews need to be more objective, just state the tempo, genre, instrumentation and key of the tracks, and maybe something to note the song structure of each track. Should probably contain an objective description of the cover art and inlay as well, along with some screencaps of the frequency response. IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whine

whine

whine

whine

whine

whine

whine

 

thought the review was funny and obviously done as a laugh + reaction at coldplay being called "alternative" or whatever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.