Father of all Motherfuckers - What are your thoughts on the new album?

[Clayish]

3 hours ago, Seanz25 said:

Fantano's criticism of the billboard was dumb, almost definitely a marketing team decision and unlikely anything to do with the band. 

Billie Joe wrote a post about the album that was arguably more cringy than the billboard, so to say that it didn't have anything to do with the band is a stretch.

[Seanz25]

4 minutes ago, Clayish said:

Billie Joe wrote a post about the album that was arguably more cringy than the billboard, so to say that it had anything to do with the band is a stretch.

Which one are you referring to out of interest? 

[Clayish]

12 minutes ago, Seanz25 said:

Which one are you referring to out of interest? 

this record is The New!

soul, Motown, glam and manic anthemic. Punks, freaks and punishers!

The Dirty messy . The Stink. ,

The lyrics are like a party and lifestyle of not giving a fuck. The life AND death of the party. Not political. Surviving in chaos. The real shit.

Me mike and Tre of the Green Day cut through the bullshit. That’s how it’s always been for us. Everything else is fake. Frauds I tell ya!!

Rock has lost its balls. We’re gonna teabag all these mother fuckers. The baddest rock band on the planet that gives a shit.

“Glorious” or “glorious anarchy” seems to be the word that keeps coming up that reflects

Dancing

Tribalism

Anxiety

Joy

Violence

Drugs

Booze

Dangerous songs for dangerous kids!

Our motto??

“Nothing says fuck you like a unicorn”

Love And kisses

Billie

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

2 minutes ago, Clayish said:

this record is The New!

soul, Motown, glam and manic anthemic. Punks, freaks and punishers!

Which sends exactly the opposite message of that poster, thus saying it was a marketing move not really representing the band is not that a stretched argument. 

[PursuitOfEpicness]

Just now, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

Which sends exactly the opposite message of that poster. 

I don't think GD OR their marketing team know what they're trying to do at this point lol

[blackplanet]

I feel like that poster was made to like...specifically target the "I WAS BORN IN THE WRONG GENERATION!!!" crowd.

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

1 minute ago, PursuitOfEpicness said:

I don't think GD OR their marketing team know what they're trying to do at this point lol

I could say at least this time there is an attempt to have a marketing strategy, compared to the last two eras, but that’s not enough. Crush did stepped on some shit, let’s see if they manage to bring it up. 

[Aidana]

Well I do believe music is subjective, but since that fantano guy is a professional reviewer and has probably heard thousands of different albums, he knows better. I still enjoy the new album, but gotta admit its pretty mediocre. If it’s not for Green day I would have never given this album a chance.

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

I don’t get why Rolling Stone publishing a 4/5 review is meaningless but a youtuber giving 0/10 is a trustable source of judgement that deserves attention, I must be too old for this 😄

[Joe.]

On 2/10/2020 at 3:37 PM, That Dude said:

The other way around

The FOAM video references the album booklet? It's obviously a nod to Elvis, assumed that was a given. Just that booklet referenced the video rather than being its own thing rather than a separate reference to Jailhouse Rock.

[Squashie]

4 minutes ago, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

I don’t get why Rolling Stone publishing a 4/5 review is meaningless but a youtuber giving 0/10 is a trustable source of judgement that deserves attention, I must be too old for this 😄

Right?! Because rollingstone hasn’t been around for 30+ years as a trusted music publication... 🤷‍♀️

[Lenny]

4 minutes ago, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

I don’t get why Rolling Stone publishing a 4/5 review is meaningless but a youtuber giving 0/10 is a trustable source of judgement that deserves attention, I must be too old for this 😄

I typically hate Anthony Fantano myself not gonna lie about that. I thought for his FOAM review he carried his critique out a lot more genuinely than the Rev Rad one. 

I see a guy who wants to like it but just can't come to terms with the new sound vs let me trash this band and give them a 6 which is actually a really good score in my standard. 

He could have been a lot more abrasive but he wasnt. 

[Joe.]

4 minutes ago, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

I don’t get why Rolling Stone publishing a 4/5 review is meaningless but a youtuber giving 0/10 is a trustable source of judgement that deserves attention, I must be too old for this 😄

Rolling Stone has just shat out reviews for years, they whitewash bad reviews of classic albums as well. Think Nevermind had like 3 stars originally and it then changed to 5.

Wheras say Fantano who's got a huge following and is known to be subjective can be seen as a bit more vested in the music and actually informed.

Just my two cents.

[jengd]

Makes you understand how just about every artist claims to never read reviews though doesn’t it?  Seems to be a real marmite record and I think some reviewers have hardly given it a chance but I don’t like to encourage these folk.

[Christian's Inferno!]

I believe fantano has given a 0 to a number of albums though which to me seems ridiculous. You probably shouldn't give more than a handful of albums a 0, albums which are basically the worst things you've ever heard or experienced.

I don't mind fantano. I watch some of his videos when he reviews bands/album that I want to know people's opinions about but he is extremely biased against certain genres of rock and he probably shouldn't even make GD reviews since he hasn't liked them in well over 20 years. I know that I have certain biases against certain bands that I'm not that into. But I'm not gonna go out of my way to make a review about said bands/albums that I know I'm not gonna like and that I know aren't trying to target me

What I do mind though is his fanbase. I think fantano's videos have created these type of people who think any album he likes is good and any album he dislikes is bad and they just try to think about albums in a "Would fantano like this album? If so, then I like it. If not, then I don't like it" or "I can't give my opinion until fantano gives his" rather than just in an "Am I enjoying this album?" way. Not saying all or even most of his fanbase is like this but you do see these kinds of people.

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

12 minutes ago, Sheenius said:

I typically hate Anthony Fantano myself not gonna lie about that. I thought for his FOAM review he carried his critique out a lot more genuinely than the Rev Rad one. 

I see a guy who wants to like it but just can't come to terms with the new sound vs let me trash this band and give them a 6 which is actually a really good score in my standard. 

He could have been a lot more abrasive but he wasnt. 

Not interested in giving this dude an additional view, but I am not saying he hasn’t the right to hate this band and make money out of it. I just don’t see this guy as a more trustable and objective source than any other reviewer. 
 

12 minutes ago, Joe. said:

Rolling Stone has just shat out reviews for years, they whitewash bad reviews of classic albums as well. Think Nevermind had like 3 stars originally and it then changed to 5.

Wheras say Fantano who's got a huge following and is known to be subjective can be seen as a bit more vested in the music and actually informed.

Just my two cents.

I imagine that the Rolling Stone reviewers (as the reviewers of the other 14 major outlets currently giving positive reviews to this record) are paid due to their music knowledge and ability to write a review. Not denying that there are dynamics like the one you mention that decrease the credibility of such sources, but on the other hand there is a dude that takes money from YouTube based on how controversial and cool his videos are, and therefore how many views they get, not necessarily a reliable source of objectivity, especially when the necessity to get views degenerate in giving 0 to this kind of record (which means controversy and debate, which means tweets, posts, views, dollars). 

I am just surprised by the balance of trust between the two sources, not saying that RS or The Guardian reviewers are written by objective human being representing what actually is good  

[Joe.]

Just now, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

 

I imagine that the Rolling Stone reviewers (as the reviewer of the other 14 major outlets currently giving positive reviews to this record) are paid due to their music knowledge and ability to write a review. Not denying that there are dynamics like the one you mention that decrease the credibility of such sources, but on the other hand there is a dude that takes money from YouTube base on how controversial and cool his video are, and therefore how many views they get, not necessarily a reliable source of objectivity, especially when the necessity to get views degenerate in giving 0 to this kind of record (which means controversy and debate, which means tweets, posts, views, dollars). 

I am just surprised by the balance of trust between the two sources, not saying that RS or The Guardian reviewers are written by objective being representing what actually is good  

Im not saying anyones right or wrong, I was replying why people care about Fantano and why Rolling Stone are a thing of the past. He's not getting views solely because he's controversial. I don't think he generally is. He's been pretty consistent with a lot of other opinions I've seen for other bands, pretty much picked the Mercury Prize shortlist in his top reviews.

[pacejunkie punk]

20 minutes ago, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

I don’t get why Rolling Stone publishing a 4/5 review is meaningless but a youtuber giving 0/10 is a trustable source of judgement that deserves attention, I must be too old for this 😄

And my guess is to the extent Billie admits to caring about reviews at all he respects Rolling Stone more than a youtuber seeking attention given his generation.

[HAPPY ZOMBIE UNICORN]

10 minutes ago, Joe. said:

Im not saying anyones right or wrong, I was replying why people care about Fantano and why Rolling Stone are a thing of the past. He's not getting views solely because he's controversial. I don't think he generally is. He's been pretty consistent with a lot of other opinions I've seen for other bands, pretty much picked the Mercury Prize shortlist in his top reviews.

Every time his name pops up in my social media feed is either because someone is really agreeing with him or hating what he says/the Argument he uses. Which is normal when you are known for more or less explicitly grounding your reviews on personal taste, which is also the only way to survive on YT. You get paid for your ability to build a public and feed it with what they want, and at the same time build a public of haters and feed them with what you know they are gonna hate. This is what I mean with controversial (and cool). 

[21st_century_gloria]

1 hour ago, Aidana Shyngysbayeva said:

since that fantano guy is a professional reviewer 

Since when? He's a YouTuber. 

Sure he makes money off reviewing music but YouTube also pays people for compilation videos of people smashing up chairs with baseball bats. 

[Hermione]

1 hour ago, Clayish said:

Billie Joe wrote a post about the album that was arguably more cringy than the billboard, so to say that it didn't have anything to do with the band is a stretch.

That's just some fun, it's like FBHT/Rev posts he used to do on Myspace. The poster contradicts Billie's attitude as he generally expresses open mindedness towards different music genres, collaborated with a Swedish producer (Avicii), cited Kendrick Lamar as an influence on FOAM and was just in a Tyla Yaweh and Wiz Khalifa video.

[Joe.]

6 minutes ago, HAPPY ROOTING UNICORN said:

Every time his name pops up in my social media feed is either because someone is really agreeing with him or hating what he says/the Argument he uses. Which is normal when you are known for more or less explicitly grounding your reviews on personal taste, which is also the only way to survive on YT. You get paid for your ability to build a public and feed it with what they want, and at the same time build a public of haters and feed them with what you know they are gonna hate. This is what I mean with controversial (and cool). 

But how many times does he pop up, baring in mind he does daily reviews? Probably not daily, or even close to that.

6 minutes ago, 21st_century_gloria said:

Since when? He's a YouTuber. 

He reviews music as a full time job, in what way is that not a professional music reviewer?

[pacejunkie punk]

1 minute ago, Joe. said:

He reviews music as a full time job, in what way is that not a professional music reviewer?

Because he does it on YouTube 😂

[21st_century_gloria]

56 minutes ago, Christian's Inferno! said:

I think fantano's videos have created these type of people who think any album he likes is good and any album he dislikes is bad and they just try to think about albums in a "Would fantano like this album? If so, then I like it. If not, then I don't like it" or "I can't give my opinion until fantano gives his" rather than just in an "Am I enjoying this album?" way. Not saying all or even most of his fanbase is like this but you do see these kinds of people.

Back when RevRad came out, someone I know trashed it as "pop crap" that "sucks because fantano gave it 3/10 stars." That was his defining leg to stand on.

Unfortunately these kinds of people are everywhere. Someone recently told me that they hated my converse shoes bc a pop star that they followed apparently doesn't like them. 😂 Literally, they hated my shoes just because of that. So I feel like anyone in a position of anything that gains a following would develop fanbases that think as such. Like you said, not all of them, and maybe not even most of them, but it is pretty frustrating tbh

32 minutes ago, Joe. said:

He reviews music as a full time job, in what way is that not a professional music reviewer?

Haha I'm not going to get into my rant about YouTubers/social media "stars" and their ease of access to professionalism here but yeah i guess in a technical sense you're right 🤷‍♀️ 

 

[CherryBombs&Gasoline]

The concept of basically judging art on a scale of 1 to 10 is a weird one, at least for me. People like structure, numbers, lists and all those things though. And that's why we are obsessed with scores and ratings. But just because and album has a certain score on Metacritic or because Anthony Fantano likes or dislikes doesn't mean that we should form our opinion based on that. Anthony Fantano has every right to say whatever he wants about this record. And I'm sure that he knows a lot about music. But in the end, it's just a video on YouTube, and a review in the Rolling Stone is just a little text in a magazine. There's no point in getting worked up about it, in my opinion. No one is 100 percent right or wrong about something as subjective as music, or art in general. Yes, I do read and watch reviews myself. But ultimately, it's all subjective. It's just to get an overview.