Oh shit, they played Disintegration? Jealous. Very Jealous. Saying that, the set they played at Reading (the second one) had "Thinking, That's All" and "Seventeen" in it, which was way cool.

Posted by superanncoulterfanclub on 2007-10-20 21:54:17
My Score:

Yeah, this album shows that JEW has plateau-ed right at Futures--and I loved Futures.

They played maybe 4 songs off Chase This Light (Big Casino, Let It Happen, Always Be, Carry You) in Anaheim. I actually dig Big Casino and Let It Happen but some of the new album feels like it could have been Futures-era out-takes.

Other songs played in Anaheim:

Futures: Work, Kill, Polaris, 23, Pain
Bleed American: Bleed American, Praise Chorus, Middle, Your House, Sweetness, Get It Faster
Clarity: Crush, Blister, Goodbye Sky Harbor, For Me This is Heaven
Stay on My Side Tonight: Disintegration

nothing off Static Prevails, bummer

- FreeOJAgainandAgain

Posted by icapped2pac on 2007-10-20 12:32:13
My Score:

Holy fucking shit. I hadn't heard "Here It Goes" until now. How fucking insulting! Total fucking dog shit excuse for music. The rest of this is mostly OK. Thankfully someone must've edited that awful vomit-inducing song out of the early copy I got.

seriously, is that a peacock's vagina?

Posted by damnitsderek on 2007-10-20 07:05:32
My Score:

That score.

Score's for my grammar in that last post.

Score is for the truth in your first post.

Posted by Deadpan on 2007-10-19 18:54:33
My Score:

And just general composition. Fuck. I fail at English.

Posted by Deadpan on 2007-10-19 18:52:33
My Score:

And syntax.

Posted by Deadpan on 2007-10-19 18:52:18
My Score:

Score's for my grammar in that last post.

Wow. I guess the demise of anonymous posting here didn't flush out all the complete fucking douchebags that post here.

Lame.

Posted by telegraphrocks on 2007-10-19 18:19:27
My Score:

"This record is solid but uneventful.

-Scott"

You, and A.P., are uneventful.... and also the opposite of "solid", so I guess that would be "watery, runny stool".

Fuck you, Scott.

I can only assume that the lyrics to Less Talk, More Rock scare some people.

Do you judge all songs under this umbrella of whether or not the words are about a real person or event? How do you know? Ask the songwriter? Or just decide based on whether or not you believe it’s believable?
How do you feel about fictional writing? Is it not worth reading? Is it not capable of making someone feel something just because it’s fiction? Fictional books and movies can incite strong emotional reactions just as much as non-fictional, so why aren’t you allowing musicians to take the same creative liberty?

he already answered this question, read the fucking thread

ha-ha ha-ha I can laugh it off......

“I assume (and expect) a singer's words to be truthful to himself, and not just those of some made up character/story.”

Do you judge all songs under this umbrella of whether or not the words are about a real person or event? How do you know? Ask the songwriter? Or just decide based on whether or not you believe it’s believable?

How do you feel about fictional writing? Is it not worth reading? Is it not capable of making someone feel something just because it’s fiction? Fictional books and movies can incite strong emotional reactions just as much as non-fictional, so why aren’t you allowing musicians to take the same creative liberty?

What a weird thing to say.

I’m not defending the new Jimmy Eat World. I gave it two stars when I reviewed it. I agree that it’s unmemorable and Atkins’s lyrics are totally goofy (especially in “Here It Goes”). But jesus. That’s a bold statement to make if you’re looking to be taken seriously, dude.

I know, i know, it's so fucking good. Polaris is AMAZING, but I think that 23 is my all time favorite song by them.

really, i just can't say enough about that album.

Futures is my favourite ever album, by about a fuckmile. I want to get lyrics from Polaris tattooed on my chest at some point. I can understand why other people might bone Clarity over it or whatever, but to me, it's kind of their peak. I've never understood why it gets so much grief from people.

very few bands give me this feeling. this album in and of itself makes me happy for no reason whatsoever.

good lord I couldn't agree with you more, this may not be their best album ever, but its still damn good. there are too many bad pop rock bands that wish they could make an album as good as this.

but my opinion is probably void to everyone because Futures is my favorite.

jones, are you saying that they never actually went back to the motor league??

that would make me sad.

it's just a speculative fiction(alized lyrics).

derp.

Posted by joseph on 2007-10-18 03:52:06
My Score:

This album grows on you as you listen to it if you're a JEW fan, but it's a bit better if you add "Be Sensible" to it. It's one of the two UK bonus tracks, and it feels like it'd be at home on their recent EP up until about halfway in, when the melodies layer and the whole thing screams of Clarity.

Oh, and Scott: I've been reading your work for years and you -are- somewhat of a hack. Get over yourself: none of us care how you feel about Hey Mercedes now vs. how you felt while you were still mourning Braid. Stop trolling this review with your narcissistic whining.

sometimes i listen to band lyrics and hope to god they are fictionalized, propagandhi comes to mind

Zing!

sometimes i listen to band lyrics and hope to god they are fictionalized, propagandhi comes to mind

- jones the bones

- stevejones8770@yahoo.com

Jake from Minus The Bear writes in a fictionalized perspective and it doesn't bother me. But doing that seems to be the antithesis of being an "emo band."

Jesse Lacey writes from a fictionalized point of view as well. It doesn't really bother me, and they can most certainly be classified as an "emo" band.

(interview with http://www.wctrib.com from 12/06 that I'm having trouble finding)

Posted by stevejonestherealbones on 2007-10-17 20:06:41
My Score:

score didnt register

- jones the bones

i hate to say it, but this album is pretty underwhelming

first they start the album with 4 forgettable songs
not to mention i am always totally let down by the first because i keep expecting A.WK to bust out with "Party Party Party"

then, the rest of the album doesnt achieve beauty like clarity or rocking songs like are on Bleed and the song Pain

basically it suffers from poor track order and some ok songs only.

this album is only worth owning if you are already a fan of the band, which i am, so thats ok, i just dont see any reason to listen to this over the other JEW albums i have

kinda the same thing that happeed with Ted Leos latest album

- jones the bones

- stevejones8770@yahoo.com

oh, and damnitsderek:

you're completely right and also, Chrono Trigger = 3rd best game of all time.

I haven't gotten the "perfect" ending, but then again, I think I've only played through it about four times. I've been meaning to do it again, but school and work..blah.

Breath of Fire and Final Fantasy III pretty much round out my favorite SNES games ever. Oh, and Zombies Ate My Neighbors. Can't forget that.

my brother must have beaten it six different times, and i know i've played through three times myself, but no perfect ending =(

Posted by dropkickmurphy01 on 2007-10-17 15:12:25
My Score:

This isn't the best JEW album to date but it is still a really good one at that.

Yeah Chrono Trigger is tight. But so is this album...

Chrono Trigger is the fucking shit.

Anyone ever get the perfect ending? Lengthy, but totally worth it, if just for New Game

oh, and damnitsderek:

you're completely right and also, Chrono Trigger = 3rd best game of all time.

colin, you know you're my e-friend and all that, but after that comment i have more respect for you than i ever thought possible.

good review too.

I have to admit I laughed at Dante's comment below
And dont listen to the haters colin
In my opinion you are one of the better reviewers on the site

And yes, that's supposed to say "on".

Every time Colin writes a review, this place erupts into a feud that is like an eerie parallel of the U.N., but about music.

Om a completely unrelated side note, the instrumentals on "Gotta Be Somebody's Blues" remind me of Magus' time period's sad music in the SNES version of Chrono Trigger.

Bitches calling bitches "bitches".
Maybe you bitches can all get together later and cry on each other's vaginas.
-Dante

scott, i don't know you personally. i have no personal beef with you. i just think you're kind of a hack professionally.

and Hey Mercedes doesn't have a single bad song.

Posted by AlmostPunkEnough on 2007-10-17 01:19:26
My Score:

don't care what anyone says, this album is their best since "Clarity".

no, it's not the same as it once was, don't care. very few bands give me this feeling. this album in and of itself makes me happy for no reason whatsoever. top 5 of the year.

"Scott, Colin has been on record saying Hey Mercedes is boring. Never could understand how anything Bob Nanna is boring and Jimmy Eat World is not."

For the record, I retracted that statement years ago, after I got over my PBBS (Post-Braid Breakup Syndrome). I think both Hey Mercedes releases are better than this new JEW record (well Every Night Fireworks definitely; Loses Control, I'd have to listen to again to make sure).

-Scott

Posted by maverick on 2007-10-16 23:54:49
My Score:

Autosuggestion made a really excellent post below, thank you for understanding where I was coming form (and thanks to fallingupwards84 for still backing me up).

Everyone should realize that this discussion wouldn't be dragging on this long if it weren't for colin (and GreenVandal) having personal beef with me. If someone else had made my remarks, it never would've gone this far.

This record is solid but uneventful.

-Scott

Scott, Colin has been on record saying Hey Mercedes is boring. Never could understand how anything Bob Nanna is boring and Jimmy Eat World is not.

A not brilliant but solid release

this is essentially how you summed up the album, Colin, and i think this is one reason why people like Scott and myself are a little frustrated that "not brilliant" albums are being given 8 stars these days.

now your analogy to art... i see where you're going with that. however, even then, if a piece of art is to receive a high "score" (we'll just pretend that people score art pieces for the sake of this argument), it must be an amazing, fascinating, brilliant piece of art... whether it is impressionist or postmodern.

and even then, i think you can judge pieces of art against various time periods. i'd argue that Van Gogh is every bit as good, if not better, than many of the classical Renaissance artists. yea its completely different forms of art, but there are general themes such as influence, originality, longevity, value, etc that are characteristic of all forms of art. and i think the same can be said about music.

also, in reference to the people saying that cursive and nofx should be graded against one another, let's take a look at it from the painting or movie angle.

can an impressionist painter be logically critiqued against a post modern performance artist? only in how well each executes their given method of conveying their concept. same with film - comparing a film like american beauty to a movie like mallrats is absolutely ridiculous. however both are great in their own regard.

i'm saying this is pop, mainstream rock music stemming from a band with an established past of putting out good hooks. maybe i graded half a star too high, but that was probably my own subjectivity thrown in the mix.

i really think half of you, while it's okay to dislike your record, are absolutely off your rockers when it comes to how records should be reviewed. except for scott, i just think he's off his rocker completely.

This argument makes no sense, mainly because going into a movie, I know it is fictional before I watch it. I assume (and expect) a singer's words to be truthful to himself, and not just those of some made up character/story.

Scott and I have certainly had our differences, but i agree 100% with him on this one. The assumption is, especially with a band like JEW with emotional lyrics, that the lyrics are true to the writer and reflect emotions inside the writer.

I heard a great quote about the "confessional" poets today - that is to say Sylvia Plath and erm... like, all those guys. It was from Anne Sexton and it went something like "there's nothing I wouldn't sacrifice for the poem" or "I would sacrifice the truth in a second for the sake of the poem". I'm too drunk to remember exactly.

My point is, even these poets, who were assumed to be writing directly from the heart, took the license to fictionalise what they were writing about for the sake of their poem. That is to say, sometimes the idea or emotion that the artist wishes to convey is more important than whether it actually happened to them. Again, drunk, so the idea is confused.

My basic point is this (and it should be in no way misconstrued as an attack on anyone, or partaking in any kind of argument or whatever it is you guys do, merely an observation I wish to make): as long as the idea is conveyed well, and we can empathise with it, does it really matter if it actually happened or not?

I for one, would say no.

i'm going to have to give this record a couple good listens before i can give it a socre. After one listen, i can probably say that i think its a better effort then Futures, but not as good as Bleed American.

The argument about album scores below is exactly why I completely ignore arbitrary numbers and stick to what the review actually says.

I can only think of a handful of albums I'd ever give 10/10. I think for a record that I really like I'd probably give it about a 7/10 on the rating scale, if I was forced to do so. To go any higher than that, the record has to completely blow me away.

i wasn't a huge fan of futures at first, but in the last few years it's become my favorite of JEW"s. i hope this is something along those lines.

Clearly these examples across mediums don't quite work. A fictional movie or play with a script and actors, a novel or short story, etc. draw upon human experiences and resonate with their audiences for a number of reasons. But I think that singers and songwriters (especially in earnest bands and bands that exist in or from a "scene" or an "underground" movement, as much as one can say Jimmy Eat World and co. do) are perceived differently, more akin to poets than anything else, but even then, as something different, something like a folk singer relaying personal accounts and communicating to and with the audience. And punk / emo / ska lyrics seem particularly in tune with anecdotal stories that involve the songwriting process, playing shows, seeing other bands, but are also far more literal in their lyrics than something else like mid 1990s grunge where you had bands like Bush, Nirvana, Stone Temple Pilots, and Pearl Jam playing mad libs and saying all kinds of nonsensical shit that was quite cryptic (not that I am equating those bands or saying their lyrics were meaningless). What I am getting at is that in these lyrics we're often looking for a direct link into one person or band's experience than them speaking and commenting more abstractly about the world. We read interviews. We know about them. Where they are from. And have or feel like we have a connection to them that is unlike what we expect from poets, who we actually give a ton more license and freedom to experiment with the form and structure of their work. I think that is where this sentiment comes from against fictional lyrics that are penned as confessionals or stories but are not presented as such- like Green Day's American Idiot or whatever.

Just because the events in a song are fictionalized, doesn't mean the emotions behind the song aren't. I think it's ludicrous to say that "For Me This is Heaven" is a less powerful song because it isn't "true".

Also, I really liked the Stay on My Side EP. I really wish JEW would go back to the longer, more drawn out songs.

This argument makes no sense, mainly because going into a movie, I know it is fictional before I watch it. I assume (and expect) a singer's words to be truthful to himself, and not just those of some made up character/story.

-Scott

i'd imagine plenty of movies draw from life experience but in the end are works of fiction. same with music and television and blah blah blah. it's what art is.

if the argument is really that confusing, then i just think you have absolutely no concept of what art is in relation to music (or anything). this album doesn't even have much artistic merit as it stands - but the fact you're detracting from it because stories might be written instead of experienced. i mean my favorite author is edgar allan poe but i don't think he locked anyone in a wine cellar because they called his family a bunch of weiners. i do think he was pretty fucked up in the head though.

Man, I just heard that Frosty the Snowman never actually occurred... Fuck that song.

Wow. Scott's limited view of what music "should" be once again impedes his ability to enjoy something. Who knew that was going to happen?

The argument that this is bad because it is fictional is beyond retarded. Music film and every other piece of art all draw from the same pool: human experience, imagination, and emotion. Everything in art (even the most heartfelt lyrics) are somewhat fictionalized and somewhat true. It's a balancing act caused by the limitations of an artists subjective view on things and it is what makes projects like this compelling.

Also, there is more to this than just the lyrics. I never get people who complain something is bad just because of lyrics. Thats only one aspect.

In related news: I'm on the fence on this. So far I think it is pretty ok.

Also, I fully back primeevil7 and fallingupwards84's comments earlier in this thread.

-Scott

"yeah see that thrice review below where scott is balls out about it?"

Huh? What does this even mean? I left one comment on the Thrice review saying I really liked the first song. You're making no sense.

-Scott

completely agree with paul.

"so i assume there's no films or movies that are fiction that have gotten you through a rough spot? you only like documentaries and autobiographies then? how about self portraits in painting? you must hate a LOT of art to be that ridiculous."

This argument makes no sense, mainly because going into a movie, I know it is fictional before I watch it. I assume (and expect) a singer's words to be truthful to himself, and not just those of some made up character/story.

-Scott

I quite enjoy this record, that's all.

Posted by Paulrulzdood on 2007-10-16 14:54:13
My Score:

. being disspointed that Adkins' lyrics are fictitious instead of autobiographical is as lame as when my friend got all bummed out that Chris Connely didn't really get his heart torn out by some bitch named Holly Hox who ditched him to go see volcano's in costa rica or that Jesse didn't really have one sweet night with him either. still brilliant songs. its art, it doesn't all have to be true stories like the real world, it just has to be good. if you spin a good yarn like connely or adkins or whoever, you're a ok in my book

2. based on one listen, i'll give this an 8/10. it's certainly an above average record. i'm not sure if it's quite as good as "futures" nothing jumps out as amazing as "23' did when i first heard futures, but not one song did I find disspointing other than the semi-boring "gotta be somebody's blues". big casino, always be, electable, carry you, chase this light all stand out after one listen and that's half the album.

3. I think futures is as good as bleed american and clarity. i never cared much for the second half of clairty other than 'for me this is heaven' and 'clarity'. i thought the second half of bleed american lagged a bit too. futures was the first one I found consistently strong all the way through.

4. overall, JEW is an outstanding band with a unique sound that appeals to those in punk, emo, pop, pop punk and indy circles. mainstream appeal yet underground appeal, a tough balance to pull off and they do it well. jim has a great voice and the musicianship is solid.

5. it's as good of a 5th JEW album as i expected.

6. arguing about the points scale is retarded. its completely subjective you douche bags. one man's 10 is another man's 1. I give new found glory's self titled a perfect 10. i give bright eye's 'lifted' a 5. suck my balls. suck colin's balls. all of you are the ball lickers.

7.the only person who really cares about yoru musical opinion is yourself.

paul

Colin, don't worry about it. I always hated the scoring system here, and kind of wish there wasn't one (kind of like Pastepunk). Scores are really so subjective, it's pretty pointless to give them one. Good review.

However, to me, this album is the worst they've ever made. I mean, one of the songs sounds like a Backstreet Boys song (Here It Goes).

i've had just as many reviews posted as ones that haven't been posted. so take that for what you will.

Posted by conebone69 on 2007-10-16 14:01:05
My Score:

Colin reviews the new Jimmy Eat World!?

NO WAY!

New Wave was much better than this.

i have to say - i'm not sure whether i really love this record or if i'm making it up in my head. jimmy eat world is one of my favorite all time bands, i love everything they have ever done. that said, the production on this record totally blows. i've been reading everywhere kids saying that they think its perfect on this record but the trombino/norton shit is way, way better sound-wise. a lot of the song's intros sound the same and i can't see this record translating well live like futures or bleed american.

it's still 100x better than most shit that gets released and reviewed on this site but it's a bit underwhelming i think. if i had never heard jimmy eat world before, i would probably think it sucked.

i think i just came to my own sad conclusion

"Great, another fanboy review from colin.

Douchebag never reviews anything that he doesn't love."

Don't be an asshole. You'd prefer someone with no knowledge of the band to review their album?

Jimmy Eat World is one of my favorite bands ever.

Great, another fanboy review from colin.

Douchebag never reviews anything that he doesn't love.

yeah see that thrice review below where scott is balls out about it?

i mean, it doesn't take too much work to find thrice's songs that are just rip offs of edgar allan poe or the bible. and i'd consider them a heart on sleevish band.

songwriters are storytellers. that is that. i realize like, geoff from thursday has a ton of personal stories about tragedy so i guess a lot of that band's songs are about his life but really to think that artists only write about themselves is fairly naive (in any aspect of art, not just music).

Posted by primeevil7 on 2007-10-16 13:01:53
My Score:

I like this record. That's not to say it's better than Bleed American, or anything else in the band's catalog.

Colin, as for your feud with Scott, I think Scott's trying to say that it's disappointing at the very least to find the words behind the songs that you invested a lot of emotional energy and now resonate in your life were...fiction. That motherfucking For Me This Is Heaven didn't happen is very nearly heartbreaking.

To find that the band you thought put their heart on their sleeve...didn't. Or, at least don't appear to now.

If you need a comparison, try how you and Justin felt about Against Me!.

For example, if I give a NOFX album a 6, and a Cursive album an 8, I'm not grading them against each other. But you can bet that I like the Cursive album a fair bit better than the NOFX album.

Yep, it means that the Cursive album is better. Or at least more enjoyable for the reviewer.

Or a Thursday versus Bad Religion review. I would give Full Collapse an 8 or 9, and I would give No Control the same score. While they're completely different genres, they're comparable in that they're both timeless records that are near perfection.
To give a JEW record that you admittedly say is "not brilliant" eight stars is a tad ridiculous. But thats just my opinion, I didnt review the record. Hell, I havent even listened to it.

Posted by cuapunkradio on 2007-10-16 12:54:22
My Score:

amazing band, flat record. anyone who says 'futures' is worse is plain wrong....

Scruffy is exactly right. An 8/10 album is an 8/10 album, regardless of any and all external factors. Scoring an album against another does not paint a clear picture of the album itself. For example, if I give a NOFX album a 6, and a Cursive album an 8, I'm not grading them against each other. But you can bet that I like the Cursive album a fair bit better than the NOFX album.

Yes! You grade the album along a scale of 10 being perfect and 1 being the worst possible record that could be made. You judge the album on its own merits, not compared to the band's previous work or to any other band's releases.

you're still getting into opinions on what the worst possible record is then - a predisposition that sets you up for disappointment regardless. judging an album after release based upon what the band has done and the track they were on seems logical. judging them based on what you think they should be doing takes too much of an individual opinion into the equation and not enough objectivity.

ever since that one guy in a past news post said that the cover looks like a vagina, i've never been able to look at this cover the same

-- "Yes! You grade the album along a scale of 10 being perfect and 1 being the worst possible record that could be made. You judge the album on its own merits, not compared to the band's previous work or to any other band's releases.

This album is worse than Futures. No depth or lasting weight to any of these songs (and the one decent song, Big Casino, rips off Lucky Denver Mint so hard they should sue themselves). If they were still losing money from this band instead of making it, they'd have broken up by now. You can tell that spark isn't there anymore."--

I like this alum a lot. great pop songs. and if you say you shouldn't compare a bands album to their body of work then why are you doing so here? comparing big casino to lucky denver mint.

the best song on here in my opinion is "gotta be somebody's blues". that song hits me every time i hear it. and by the way, to say the spark isn't there anymore defeats the argument. carry you is a reworking of a very old song by Jim. I like this album a bit more than futures, except for polaris. that song's damn near perfect.

Yeah, I've got to say, using a band's back catalog as a means of judging a score renders it completely meaningless on a wider scale. Why bother giving it an 8 if an 8 for Jimmy Eat World doesn't correspond to an 8 for say, well... any other band?

Posted by Scruffy on 2007-10-16 12:02:39
My Score:

" but do you grade say, the new thrice against the new bright eyes? cursive against nofx? bad religion against thursday?"

Yes! You grade the album along a scale of 10 being perfect and 1 being the worst possible record that could be made. You judge the album on its own merits, not compared to the band's previous work or to any other band's releases.

This album is worse than Futures. No depth or lasting weight to any of these songs (and the one decent song, Big Casino, rips off Lucky Denver Mint so hard they should sue themselves). If they were still losing money from this band instead of making it, they'd have broken up by now. You can tell that spark isn't there anymore.

Posted by danperrone on 2007-10-16 11:41:39
My Score:

this album is about as deep as a puddle. the lyrics are SO FUCKING BAD and there are only three good songs: "let it happen," "electable," and "always be"

i know that this topic has come up before in some of your reviews, but i think your theory on scoring albums is completely bullshit. the score should reflect how good the album is in general compared to what else is out there musically. you cant score an album in relation to previous efforts.
if Aiden somehow miraculously made an album that was half-listenable, should it get 8 stars because their previous albums were incredibly bad and this one managed to be ok? no, it should still be judged and scored in relation to the music world in general.

that's a good point but i mean, really, then you get into the genre debate. i did grade this as a pop record, too - i didn't compare it (in my head) to independent releases really. but do you grade say, the new thrice against the new bright eyes? cursive against nofx? bad religion against thursday?

at what point are the lines drawn in reviews as far as genre comparisons and scoring? it's something i deal with every review i write and this is where i'm at now. it might change but for the time being, this is how i do.

i grade based on what the band has accomplished and where i believe this sits in their discography - not in relation to every other band out there. if you compare this to some of the better records this year, of course it won't be as high scored.

i know that this topic has come up before in some of your reviews, but i think your theory on scoring albums is completely bullshit. the score should reflect how good the album is in general compared to what else is out there musically. you cant score an album in relation to previous efforts.
if Aiden somehow miraculously made an album that was half-listenable, should it get 8 stars because their previous albums were incredibly bad and this one managed to be ok? no, it should still be judged and scored in relation to the music world in general.

So "not brilliant but solid" gets four stars? What a joke.

i would give clarity and static prevails 10/10, bleed american 9/10, this 8 and futures a 6 along with teh stay on my side tonight ep (which i did). i grade based on what the band has accomplished and where i believe this sits in their discography - not in relation to every other band out there. if you compare this to some of the better records this year, of course it won't be as high scored.

but this is a solid effort for a mainstream rock album, a genre that is ridiculously piss poor with linkin park etc etc. so yes. it was a border between 7 and 8, i gave the band the benefit of the doubt because aside from futures they've had records i've listened to for years.

There's nothing wrong with it as a writing style, but when you and your band have made a career out of heavy-handed, heart-on-sleeve emoting that resonates most loudly with a teenage audience who then sticks with you through thick and thin, it's just weird to look back and realize all those times you used their songs to get through a hard time, it was fake. Their words provided no real support system.

so i assume there's no films or movies that are fiction that have gotten you through a rough spot? you only like documentaries and autobiographies then? how about self portraits in painting? you must hate a LOT of art to be that ridiculous.

the fact that planes mistaken for stars goes underappreciated around here doesn't really surprise me. i was thinking about not putting the comparison in but it more came down to the idea that the perspective the band is writing from is one that is generally very dark whereas they bring a unique light to it.

Posted by ConsolationPrizefighter on 2007-10-16 09:56:12
My Score:

You should have not included the PMFS paragraph at all. I'm not saying you're wrong in your comparison, but it doesn't fit in that review at all. Otherwise not bad.

"scott - just wondering, what is it that you don't like about a fictionalized point of view?"

There's nothing wrong with it as a writing style, but when you and your band have made a career out of heavy-handed, heart-on-sleeve emoting that resonates most loudly with a teenage audience who then sticks with you through thick and thin, it's just weird to look back and realize all those times you used their songs to get through a hard time, it was fake. Their words provided no real support system.

Like I said, other bands, I have no problem with that. Jake from Minus The Bear writes in a fictionalized perspective and it doesn't bother me. But doing that seems to be the antithesis of being an "emo band."

-Scott

Posted by Oldpunkerforever on 2007-10-16 07:57:06
My Score:

nice suprise, not expecting it to be as good as it is, better than futures, perfect fall weather cd-oldpunker-

Posted by Deadpan on 2007-10-16 06:01:12
My Score:

Here It Goes has actually been lodged in my head for the past fortnight or so, and is easily one of my favourite tracks off this album.

to ne honest, I think this album is fantastic, but I feel puzzled when I listen to it. It just feels like it could have been longer, or more expansive, but somehow ends up more concise and crisp than Futures, despite Butch Vig's presence in the producer's chair. I'm still not entirely sure what to make of it.

4starreviews.org

Posted by keithybobeefy on 2007-10-16 02:40:55
My Score:

Score is for the review and album.

I think one of the things that makes people so happy with Jimmy Eat World is the honesty that is in their music. It's just a good time. Also, they are really cool guys that really care about what they're doing.

scott - just wondering, what is it that you don't like about a fictionalized point of view?

Also:

"colin, planes mistaken for stars isn't that good.
chill out"

Seconded wholeheartedly.

-Scott

Posted by maverick on 2007-10-16 02:26:52
My Score:

So "not brilliant but solid" gets four stars? What a joke.

This record is paper-thin in terms of depth (both sonically and emotionally). Jimmy Eat World can do so much better. It's enjoyable for what it is, but ultimately forgettable in their catalog.

To be honest, what really turns me off to this record is that Jim writes from a fictionalized point of view. All of his characters and stories are completely invented. After I learned that, I've had a harder time connecting with his songs, even ones I used to love.

-Scott

eh i'm not motivated at all to listen to this... while i have nothing necessarily bad in specific to say about their previous three releases, this band just bores the shit out of me in general

Vagina.

first sentence is hilarious.

Posted by captaincrunch on 2007-10-16 00:30:55
My Score:

I'm really underwhelmed by this. I feel like it is really missing the emotion that really set JEW apart from others in the genre.

They are still one of my favorites, though.

colin, planes mistaken for stars isn't that good.
chill out

I must apologize to the Punknews.org Community

Maybe some of you have scene my public announcement in News articles for Sellout bands Like Ghost Mice and Less Than Jake and Circa Survive and HelloGoodBye and Protest The Hero and Low Budgets and Angels And Airwaves (thats one band, not a band named angels and a band named airwaves) and Jimmy Eat World and Flatliners and Chiodos and Futureheads and Trustkill Pure and 20th Anniversaries and Lifetime and BlackLips and Angels and Airwaves (this time two bands) and Billy Bragg and Some bands you never heard of and Terror and Sum 41and Some Cartoon Thing and a couple a queergay bands in kerrang and the Vynil File (which i fuckin love, but lets face it, SELLOUTS) and Dead to Me some Canucks and Drill Killer and Horse the Band and Every Time I dies and StreetlightManifesto and Anti Flag And Municipal Wastwe and The Riot Before and Most of the GOvernment Issue and Forecasts and Against Me!...

"Just like Against Me! and Jimmy Eat World and Golgo Bordello and coheed and cambria and Lou Reed and the Killers and Les Breasts and Nikola Servic and Heavy Heavy Low Low and New Review Tuesday and I am Ghost and Fake Probs and Modern Life is Sick of It all and Mastadon and Indie Band and Young Livers and Fun FUn FUn Fest and Mike Park and Against Me! and FooFighters and Farewell and TINC and Jimmy Eat WOrld, this band is such a sellout and a flag bearer for the MTV generation.

- colin"

That was not realy Colin, that was I, Stevejonestherealbones

- jones the bones

- stevejones870@yahoo.com

- Shit, i forgot to clarify, I only did these posts, I'm not the other dorkus malorkus who impersonates colin. i only did the format seen here

this isn't an abandonment of their prior sound at all. infact, it's less poppy than futures.