omrimayo Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 28 minutes ago, Catch22 said: Yet they gave the original also 3/5 Pure hate. You can't write these things and give it 60 which is barley passable. Dumb.
Tistotal Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 Red hair woman can do everything, she literally can make 1989 being a +90 album it’s all about PR after all 2
Cruel Summer Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 4 minutes ago, Cloröx said: The Guardian: 5/5 We love her again!
WildHeart Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 8 hours ago, Anvarie said: Imagine if Beyoncé re-recorded I Am Sasha Fierce and critics suddenly gave it a 90. That’d make about as much sense as these Taylor albums getting rave reviews Why are you comparing a mediocre album like IASF to the likes of 1989 and Red and act like you made a point 1989 and Red were two of the most acclaimed albums of last decade. If she recorded Self Titled and got a higher score thanks to its retrospective acclaim, it would make as much sense.
Finkypop Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 4 hours ago, Mordecai said: The fact that this is more critically acclaimed than albums like Golden Hour is such a pisstake 1989 is literally better, so 3
simmnfierzig Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 Deserved. The TVs are the best yet. Also dont get the Style TV hate at all. Vault is also very solid. Hopefully the final score can stay over 90 1
4Real Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 It's not realistic that these critics hear the terrible karaoke-like production on these re-recorded tracks then listen to those bland uninspired no-melody vault tracks and think "oh masterpiece 10/10 instant classic!" bfr. The original 1989 is pure pop perfection with immaculate production and infectuous tunes but without Max Martin she clearly couldn't recreate the whole magic of it and that's perfectly fine to admit! These 10/10 reviews that come out minutes after the album drops on Spotify are all paid (especially RS lol). Crazy that yall are already convincing yourselves that this is good and in a few weeks yall will say it's better than the original album which it is NOT at all, but apparently there is no critical thinking in the Swift fandom. That's why she'll keep releasing generic trash like Midnights from now on. But well we'll always have her great output from 2006 til 2020, at least 2 4 1
Lille Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 8 hours ago, Mordecai said: The fact that this is more critically acclaimed than albums like Golden Hour is such a pisstake What's the issue? 1989 is the better album, always has been.
EtherealCat Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 did the critics listen to the original by mistake 5
G.U.Y. Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 Have reviews become branded content nowadays? 1
ZIVERT Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 Next new era She will make history as the first artist to get a 100 MC score, I speak it into existence
Life Savers Posted October 27, 2023 Posted October 27, 2023 (edited) 13 hours ago, Mordecai said: The fact that this is more critically acclaimed than albums like Golden Hour is such a pisstake Why? It's better. And perhaps more importantly, Golden Hour (also excellent) did not shape country the way 1989 shaped pop. Edited October 28, 2023 by Life Savers
AvadaKedavra Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 I think critics are giving the review to the album itself and not the re-records. The chance they never got to fairly rank 1989 the iconic best seller. Even if this album production is 3/5 the aesthethic,the songs,the videos are amazing. It deserves a 85-90.
Redstreak Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 7 hours ago, 4Real said: It's not realistic that these critics hear the terrible karaoke-like production on these re-recorded tracks then listen to those bland uninspired no-melody vault tracks and think "oh masterpiece 10/10 instant classic!" bfr. The original 1989 is pure pop perfection with immaculate production and infectuous tunes but without Max Martin she clearly couldn't recreate the whole magic of it and that's perfectly fine to admit! These 10/10 reviews that come out minutes after the album drops on Spotify are all paid (especially RS lol). Crazy that yall are already convincing yourselves that this is good and in a few weeks yall will say it's better than the original album which it is NOT at all, but apparently there is no critical thinking in the Swift fandom. That's why she'll keep releasing generic trash like Midnights from now on. But well we'll always have her great output from 2006 til 2020, at least Sorry but it was better than OG on release crisp and clear vocals please!
mael Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 I mean, they're just giving the flowers She rightly deserved after all this time.
littlebodybigheart Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 3 minutes ago, mael said: I mean, they're just giving the flowers She rightly deserved after all this time. exactly!
Relampago. Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 The ACCLAIM, the annoying Swifties having meltdowns over the songs not being 100% the exact replica lost Imo, most of the songs are improvements on the originals, which is crazy considering how good 1989 OG was. I don’t care what anyone says, Style TV is an improvement on an already perfect song. I was gagged, she deserves the acclaim. My only complaint is that I wish she put this level of effort into Speak Now TV, rather than the phoned in mess we got 4 2
Pheromosa Posted October 28, 2023 Posted October 28, 2023 5 minutes ago, Relampago. said: I don’t care what anyone says, Style TV is an improvement on an already perfect song. I was gagged, she deserves the acclaim. its literally better in every way. even the quality of her voice is vastly superior. the CLARITY. They don't get it 1
.thumb.gif.69950d48f19048d3568db954960ad6f2.gif)
Recommended Posts