Home› The Porch

Pitchfork Review of Lightning Bolt

AnarmyofpeaceAnarmyofpeace Posts: 254
edited October 2013 in The Porch
I think the rating is low but I found the write-up to be fair/somewhat accurate. The part I agree with most, "Pearl Jam ceased long ago to be a band that makes records with any sense of occasion to them: no intriguing backstory, no conceptual constructs to shape the album’s identity, no new contemporary influences that might push them in an unexpected direction."

With that being said, I enjoy the new album and always look forward to new material.

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/186 ... ning-bolt/
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • PG98467PG98467 Posts: 108
    It's not getting very good reviews-poor to average mostly.
  • vant0037vant0037 Posts: 6,162
    Anarmyofpeace wrote:
    I think the rating is low but I found the write-up to be fair/somewhat accurate. The part I agree with most, "Pearl Jam ceased long ago to be a band that makes records with any sense of occasion to them: no intriguing backstory, no conceptual constructs to shape the album’s identity, no new contemporary influences that might push them in an unexpected direction."

    With that being said, I enjoy the new album and always look forward to new material.

    http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/186 ... ning-bolt/

    I just read this and had the same exact response. The review of 5.0 isn't actually all that bad in Pitchfork terms (where everything gets at 6.4, unless it's spacey fuzz rock or synthed out power pop), but the number given doesn't really match the content written. It reads like it would be a better review than they give it.

    Considering what Pitchfork has said in the past, I'm a bit surprised. They usually hate PJ. I'm glad they at least gave credit to the band for it's successes (which they've failed to do in the past).
    1998-06-30 Minneapolis
    2003-06-16 St. Paul
    2006-06-26 St. Paul
    2007-08-05 Chicago
    2009-08-23 Chicago
    2009-08-28 San Francisco
    2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
    2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
    2011-09-03 PJ20
    2011-09-04 PJ20
    2011-09-17 Winnipeg
    2012-06-26 Amsterdam
    2012-06-27 Amsterdam
    2013-07-19 Wrigley
    2013-11-21 San Diego
    2013-11-23 Los Angeles
    2013-11-24 Los Angeles
    2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
    2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
    2014-10-09 Lincoln
    2014-10-19 St. Paul
    2014-10-20 Milwaukee
    2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
    2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
    2018-06-18 London 1
    2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
    2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
    2022-09-16 Nashville
    2023-08-31 St. Paul
    2023-09-02 St. Paul
    2023-09-05 Chicago 1
    2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
    2024-09-15 Fenway 1
    2024-09-27 Ohana 1
    2024-09-29 Ohana 2
  • CranMalReignCranMalReign Posts: 1,928
    PG98467 wrote:
    It's not getting very good reviews-poor to average mostly.

    For what it's worth, it has a metascore of 73...

    http://www.metacritic.com/music/lightning-bolt/pearl-jam
    • 98 Pgh
    • 00 Pgh
    • 03 Pgh|Philly|PSU|Camden 1+2|Hershey
    • 04 Boston 1|Reading
    • 05 Philly
    • 06 Camden 1+2|Pgh
    • 08 Camden 1+2|Hartford|Mansfield 2
    • 09 Philly 1 [EV]|Toronto|Spectrum 1-4
    • 10 Cleveland|Buffalo
    • 11 Philly [EV]|PJ20
    • 12 Philly
    • 13 London|Pgh|Buff|Philly 1+2|Balt
    • 14 Cincy|StL
    • 16 Philly 1+2|Philly 2 [TotD]
    • 18 Boston 1+2
  • GmoneyGmoney Posts: 1,618
    Anarmyofpeace wrote:
    I think the rating is low but I found the write-up to be fair/somewhat accurate. The part I agree with most, "Pearl Jam ceased long ago to be a band that makes records with any sense of occasion to them: no intriguing backstory, no conceptual constructs to shape the album’s identity, no new contemporary influences that might push them in an unexpected direction."

    With that being said, I enjoy the new album and always look forward to new material.

    http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/186 ... ning-bolt/

    While I think that quote applies to ST and Backspacer, I don't think it applies to Lighting Bolt. I feel the sense of purpose in this album. I sense the occasion, I see the backstory and it's riddled with conceptual constructs. I take Pitchfork with a grain of salt. They simply don't like grunge bands or bands from that era / style, especially pj. Arcade fire album will get a 9, pj could make the same album and it would get a 6. I know some people who work there and hipsters have something against pj for whatever reason. F'em. I give it a 9.
    Further back and forth a wave will break on me, today...
  • Vedd HeddVedd Hedd Posts: 4,618
    Haha, pitchfork sucks.

    Even if you dont like the music, there is definitely a backstory and its about as 'conceptual' as PJ gets.

    Terrible.
    Turn this anger into
    Nuclear fission
  • october22october22 Posts: 2,533
    Wow, that's actually not a bad review coming from the biggest dickheads in on the internet. Weird how they didn't mention the albums three best songs though...
  • VeddernarianVeddernarian Posts: 1,924
    Their negative review reaffirms what a great album it is. I'd hate to hear PJ come up with an album they liked. Can't imagine what it would sound like because I don't listen to those stations.
    Up here so high I start to shake, Up here so high the sky I scrape, I've no fear but for falling down, So look out below I am falling now, Falling down,...not staying down, Could’ve held me up, rather tear me down, Drown in the river
  • AlfonzAlfonz Posts: 126
    I don't read Pitchfork any more, but it is actually a reasonable review, apart from not commenting on the best 2 songs on the album. Hard to argue with most of what is written.

    I give the album a similar score ... about a 5/6 out of 10. It isn't anything special, it is mediocre as a whole album. Half decent, half filler. At least to my ears.
Sign In or Register to comment.