donjunio

The bitterness towards the groups mentioned by Qzerty is, I believe, a reaction for many to the grandiloquence with which they are treated by specialized media. Especially by those who perhaps were musically shaped in the 90s, a decade where the values were different, where it would have been unthinkable to see bands like Pearl Jam or Tool perform showcases at fashion shows or compose songs for Coca-Cola. After all, it's not like the fans of these groups shine in their invective: the very review of the monkeys that preceded me didn't go beyond fifth-grade comments in exalting the band.

Of course I’m interested in your point of view, Copernicus. This is a music forum, and no one has the truth in their pocket. Someone throws a stone in the pond with a review, and we discuss regardless of the attitude with which we view this or that phenomenon. I didn’t like this album, and I felt compelled to comment on it, explaining the reasons for my judgment. That’s all. I’m well aware that the raw material isn’t of the highest quality and that the aforementioned group fundamentally aims for relaxation and fun, and much of my review unfolds on ironic tracks if you pay attention.

Mikornr, honestly I believe that in Italy there are better things than the Arctic Monkeys, there's no need to be foreign-enthusiasts at all costs. Unfortunately, indie bands here don't have the same success. But the history of the two countries is not comparable. The Monkeys play a genre with energy - britpop - on which everything has already been said, and which has always been recycled in England, never going out of fashion. It doesn't seem like a great achievement to me, with all due respect for a group of kids. I can give you credit, though, that most twenty-somethings here dream of breaking through through "Amici" or emulating Cremonini, while in England they follow in the footsteps of Oasis. On this, you are certainly right: we don't make a good impression.
Then, regarding the album in question, everyone has their own tastes: indeed, the comments show a wide variety of opinions on this. I simply found it boring. They did make a good single, though. Maybe later they will surprise even the most skeptical, who knows.
About NME, dear Sfascia Carrozze: I always check the website for a bit of a laugh, certainly not giving it any importance. In their own way, they are a sign of the times, and that says a lot about many things, alas.

The album sounds a bit dull, frankly, with all due respect to those who shower it with extravagant praise (like pitchforkmedia, which gave it a 9.0 rating). As talented as they are, this seems like a misstep to me. As is often the case, I completely agree with easy cure.

Well done, Open mind, you've highlighted the merits of excellent work. As far as I'm concerned, this is the way to rock these years: nothing but fuck forever, or similar nonsense.

I bought this album about a month ago, and I am crazy about it. I would have liked to write the review myself, but open mind as always leaves no prisoners. Great job!

Excellent review, this is definitely an extraordinary record. They were not just incredibly talented musicians—many remember them only for having been Dylan's backing band—but they have also made an indelible mark with this album (and not just this one).

Great band. It's a shame that many know them only for their split single with Nirvana (Cobain loved Scratch Acid). Denison is still one of the best guitarists around.

"I am a child" was on "Last time around," the Buffalo Springfield album released in 1968 shortly after the group's breakup. As Emanuel says, "Sugar mountain" was a 45 RPM single, and it can be found on "Decades," the compilation released in 1977. Although the Live Rust version is the best. I also love that live recording, especially the first part.

Indeed, they are too similar to Air, but some episodes shine with their own light. The tribal Likufanele, for example: Air has never gone that deep.