Metal Reviews

I would just like to say that every reviewer writing for the site now is damn good. Sure, many of the old reviews flat out suck, but not now.

I generally overuse certain terms while reviewing, mainly because I don't like describing a guitar solo as a "blazing bolt of fiery lightning." I find that to be ridiculous. "Killer solo" works for me. Keep it simple is what I say.

I like this reviewing style:

AND THEN THEY GO INTO THAT GUITAR SOLO THAT'S LIKE "BREEEDALEEPDWEEEEEP" AND SPLITS MY BRAIN RIGHT THE FUCK IN TWO BEFORE THAT BREAKDOWN FLIES OUT AND SMASHES MY HEAD LIKE "BRAM DAM BRAM DAMDAMDAM"

They are not being ignored. I just have nothing to post about most of the albums being reviewed.
I prefer to post on the following:

Viking (pagan/black)
neoclassical
power metal (sympho/standard)
trad heavy/power
Hard Rock/Glam

It has been alot of prog/basic death/black or ambient and more obsure hard rock :( For my i try to stay out of posts I know nothing about.
There really has not been alot going on in the last month in these departments if you ask me :(

i for one, usually don't read reviews of bands that don't play a subgenre of metal that I like. If it's a really high score, then I probably will, just to get an idea, but otherwise...

I've been away from teh internets but I've read every single review posted since then from my mobile phone. I'm as loyal as they come biatch.


But I can't read the forums. The pages are too biggy.

We should make a cell phone commercial out of that and sell it to your wireless carrier...

Kathaarian - "When I'm away from my computer, I can miss alot of important shit, like the new reviews every Monday on metalreviews.com. Luckily, thanks to my (brand name) phone, I can catch all the action, whenever I want."