Dead Machine wrote:
Afro Lint wrote:
In defense of these turds, reviewing isn't easy. Do you have any idea how many times I use the word "killer" in reviews? All the damn time! And I hate it. But it's hard to not follow trends if you write reviews consistently. It's not like telling a story, where characters and settings change the way you write. With reviews you're writing about the same thing every frickin' time. Yeah, different bands, but you're writing about the exact same things. It's hard to keep things fresh. I generally hate most of my reviews. Haha. They seem cool at first, like Zad said, but later you're like, "Fuck me...that's dreadful." But it doesn't matter, because most people don't read all your reviews, so they probably don't pick up on those things.
With that said, some people clearly have no business writing anything.
ken speaks the truth on this matter
I generally don't like anything I've ever written in terms of reviews with maybe two exceptions.
it's just very difficult to be inventive or interesting when you're writing essentially the same thing over and over again. Very little can be done with the format in general.
that metallica review is just balls though.
I agree that it is hard to be inventive when writing a review, but I don't really think that is the point. The main purpose is to be informative, and being interesting comes second.
It's also worth mentioning that reviews of bands you are already familiar with are much easier to write / read and are more interesting because of that. As for bands you have never heard of, the score and the "it sounds like band x, y, and z mixed together" sentence are what help to draw you in and check out the band, or stay away.
