At 11/25/12 03:27 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:
At 11/25/12 10:19 AM, ElGhoulio wrote:
Yeah, I mean the very title of the review contradicts the score. If it's "flawed", then it by definition can't be 100, since 100 means "flawless". Some people don't understand that well. 100 is supposed to be "flawless" and without a SINGLE complaint AT ALL, and NO room for improvement.
At the very end of the review he explains he would have given the album something like 75% but gave it 100% for the uniqueness and feeling of the album. I get the point, but it still feels kind of weird to me because of the various flaws he points out through the review.
Even if the "uniqueness" and "feeling" of the album makes up for the flaws, if it has flaws, then it can get better, and thus does not deserve the 100.
If it makes you feel better, that review is old, and they've gotten quite stricter in the last 4 or so years. That review probably wouldn't get accepted today.
The review is good though, and I most say that I like seing someone give a positive review for St. Anger, especially the way this one dude did it. Just the score bothers me. A 90-95% would have been more appropriate.
Long does not mean good for me. I read that review, and honestly it is score bumping, nothing more. He spends most of it trying to justify the 100, and fails because he points out several flaws, which automatically denies the 100. It's an ok review in my opinion, and given the content, similar to what you said, an 85 - 90 would've been far more appropriate. People seem to think that 100 just means they like the album -- when nowadays I only gave out one 100, and that was for Nokturnal Mortum's Voice of Steel album, and that's because I cannot, for the life of me, find anything I don't like about it.
Bogdan Raczynski -- Bog's Basil & Curry Powder Pot
I have two plays for this guy on last.fm :)
I've been in an electro mood lately
Was just a second ago blasting Mayhem -- A Bloodsword and a Colder Sun, just now switched to Aborym -- Does Not Compute in my playlist