Not Exactly a Qualified Reviewer

[Tulkamir]

I read your reviews on In Flames. I have to say, you have to be the most ignorant reviewer I've read for a while. While I can respect your opinions that In Flames is not a very good band, you have two huge problems. One is that you seem to feel the need to compare one band to another. When reviewing you review based SOLEY on the material at hand. You had a fetish goin on with comparing In Flames to Iron Maiden. Was just sad.

Second, you bash songs for things that you have no goddamn clue about. Here, let me quote one case of such blatant ignorance.

"Metaphor - The most difficult song for me to review. In the old school fan eye, it sucks. It sounds nothing like In Flames. Nothing in this song would even hint to it being In Flames. Hell, there's a violin in it for Christ sakes."

Nice one retard. Listen to In Flames first CD (Lunar Strain, as I'm assuming you dont know based on your lack of knowlege so far) and tell me that you hear no violins.

So, in closing, you have no clue how to review. While your opinion on their music is fine if you don't like it, your reviews aren't.

[edit] Sorry, read the name of the forum as the same as that of the reviewer, and didn't see the discription. This should be in "Lamp's BBQ Pit Of Unearthly Lovin'".[/edit]

[1:(]

Don't worry, I moved the thread for you.

While I didn't write any of the In Flames reviews(I can assume that's Skin Splitter's work since you posted it in that forum originally), all I can say is that all reviews are based completely on opinion. You can say what you want about comparing bands to each other or not sounding like old songs, but if you want to hear a new band, you're going to wonder what other bands they may sound like. And if you haven't heard the old In Flames stuff and you've bought their new CD, you may be wondering whether or not their other stuff sounds like this. I really don't think you've got anything to complain about. Just take all this with a grain of salt.

[Tulkamir]

Thanks. And if you read the full post you'd know I do have something to complain about. Writing a review under the guise of an "Old School" fan when in reality you know little of the band is plenty of reason to complain. Which is what he did. To say "othing in this song would even hint to it being In Flames. Hell, there's a violin in it for Christ sakes." is proof of this. Atleast two songs(that I can remember as of now) had heavy violins in them on the first CD, Lunar Strain. Now I dunno if all his reviews are this uninformed, but I also won't waste time reading after seeing that.

[1:(]

Well, I don't listen to In Flames so I can't say anything in their defense. However, don't judge our entire site based on one review. There's plenty for us to offer. Stick around. See the sights. And have a banana.

[Tulkamir]

Haha, well, I agree that judging the site by one review is not a good idea. However this thread will make or break my view of this site.

As for sticking around... well it deffinatly wouldn't be bad depending on what you all are like. Guess we'll see, does seem like a fairly cool site otherwise. Though first impressions are big.

[1:(]

Well, I've been extremely lazy so far. The three newest reviews from me are the ones that have been up there for a while. However, I did send Shevy three more so...STAY TUNED!!

[Tulkamir]

Ahh, good stuff. What did ya review?

[1:(]

As The Sun Sets - 7744
Backstabbers Inc. - Theory/History 7"
Lightning Bolt - Ride The Skies

All of them are full reviews too. Everything else I've done is Quick Review.

[Shevy]

I was just working on your As The Sun Sets review this morning, Lamp.

Anyway, Tulkamir, welcome to the site, man. Sorry you're not down with Skin's review. When you get a second, I wrote a pretty negative review of Clayman. Check it out and let me know what you think: www.kickedintheface.com/reviews/In_Flames-Clayman.htm

It seems like you're a pretty big In Flames fan, and I wrote this review as an In Flames fan trying to give them credit for their history and things they've done right with the album (although not quite living up to their potential).

I'll let Skin Splitter defend himself, but I've always looked at his reviews like a personal color commentary mixed with large, subtle doses of sarcasm. Kind of like Dave Berry meets Bobby Heenan.

[Tulkamir]

Well, as to skin splitter defending himself... I've been sort of waiting for that. I'd like to know what he has to say to it.

As for your review... while I respect your opinion that it isn't as good as the previous stuff, I do think that some certain review philosophies around here need changing. One thing is that you review as a fan of the band. This is a huge mistake. No reviewer should be reviewing as a fan, even if it is a critical one. You went into the review with a certain mindset that affected how yous aw it. Because it wasn't hte same as other In Flames it wasn't as good. Not only this, you at one point brought in other bands. Huge mistake. A review should not be a comparison. It can have other reccomendations, but that should be separate from the review body.

This killed any real weight I could put into the review.

Not only this, there should be no "old school" to review from. There is one kind of fan of In Flames. And that is it, no old, no new. If you liked em from the start you should be able to realize that a band will evolve witht he people in it. They aren't always going to make the same style of music exactly, which is good. As long as they hold to their roots it will still be their music.

Now, also, some things bugged me in there, assumptions. That clayman would be a bad album to get into In Flames from is asnine.

Let me give you a little insight onto my past week and a half. Got my best friend, a bit of a metal head, to listen to In Flames. Loved them, they are now his favourite band. Got one of my other best buds to listen to em, he listened to only Rap and hated metal. He loves In Flames now as well. Got my girlfriend, who listens to about anything, really into them. Got one of my other friends who listened to punk into em. She loves them as well.

Now, why do I tell you this? Because what songs got these people into them do you think? The first 6 I send to anyone are as follows: Quiet Place, Cloud Connected, Metaphor, Trigger, Whoracle, and Only for the Weak. Only for the Weak is a favourite of those. It not only got a "d", but was on the album that only an in flames lover could like. Where's the logic I ask?

There are more examples, but all in all the reviews I've read around here are based too much on old views of bands, set idea's, etc... A review should review with a fully open mind. All that I've read here are reviewed with set minds. Not good.

[dangerzone]

NOT REALLY PAL. WHEN HORATIO REVIEWS ALBUMS HE TRIES TO BRING A NEW SLANT TO THEM. TRY TO FIND A REVIEW OF 'PROJECTS IN THE JUNGLE' OR GENERAL OPINIONS OF MICHAEL BOLTON ELSEWHERE LIKE HORATIO HAS. HARD TO FIND AREN'T THEY?

[Tulkamir]

Buddy, move your pinky about a quarter of an inch left for me, hit the caps lock key, and I might give a fine fuck what you have to say. Otherwise, you just proved your a flipping idiot who should have no merit put into what is said.

As to what you said, I dunno who Horatio is, and don't care. And don't want to look for jungles-whatever-the-hell-it-was or Michael Bolton, because I couldn't care less about them either. Why? Because neither this Horatio or those artists are what is being looked at in this thread.

So now that you've made yourself look like a dumbass goodly, why don't you put your tail between your legs and walk away like a good idiot.

[1:(]

Tulkamir said:

Well, as to skin splitter defending himself... I've been sort of waiting for that. I'd like to know what he has to say to it.

He doesn't check this board very much.

Tulkamir said:

Buddy, move your pinky about a quarter of an inch left for me, hit the caps lock key, and I might give a fine fuck what you have to say. Otherwise, you just proved your a flipping idiot who should have no merit put into what is said.

That is Horatio. And you can't mess with his gimmick.

Also, you like In Flames a lot. Do you know the guys in person? Because otherwise, it comes across as somewhat creepy.

[Tulkamir]

dangerzone is horatio? And he's a reviewer here? Deffinatly not a good sign if that's what he gives for a first impression.

And I like In Flames a lot. It'd be creepy if I were to say something about the band members personal selves. Which I haven't and can't. Their music is however my favourite. And, like anyone (with friends atleast) does, I listen to it around my friends and trade music with them. If that was the creepy part. Or, if it's creepy that I don't like your reviews... like I said, I could care less about what you think of them, if you hate em write a review saying "I hate In Flames" and I'll say "Good Job!". However, it's how your reviews are written that matters. And that's what I complained about.

[1:(]

I don't know. I just don't see what the big deal is. Even if you do have a problem with the opinions(or "facts") expressed in the review, it's not like we're going to change it. I think the only way we'd change a review is if there was some error in the side stuff like year it came out, band members, etc. I'm pretty sure my Excruciation review has a year error.

Also, you're pretty much digging yourself into a hole. I don't think insulting all of us is really the best way to get attention, although you could be one of those "grow on" people.

[Tulkamir]

I insulted dangerzone only. Why? Because he went against message board etiquite and used all caps and was rude in general.

Second, I never planned on staying, so no worries about growing on. I came to this site cause a friend was searching for a picture of the Reroute to Remain cover and ended up on the review. Read it, laughed at it, sent it to me, I did the same and figured I'd make a post here(as there is no reviewer e-mail provided).

When I wrote the post I wrote it because, as I do for any review I see on the net, whether it be for a computer game, movie, book, music, or whatever else, the reviewer wrote an uninformed review which stated opinions as facts and used information that was completely false as fact as well. Any respectable site WOULD edit a review or redo it all together if this happened.

(Oh, btw, if this thread wasn't a good way to get your attention I don't wanna know what is, because it seems to be doing a hell of a lot better than any other thread on these forums currently is).

[1:(]

Yeah, this forum's dead. Please don't go.

In fact, bring all your friends too. We'll have a jamboree.

[Shevy]

Oh, good lord. Where to begin?

Well, as to skin splitter defending himself... I've been sort of waiting for that. I'd like to know what he has to say to it.

He checks in from time to time. He's not your typical message board type. He'll see this thread...eventually.

As for your review... while I respect your opinion that it isn't as good as the previous stuff, I do think that some certain review philosophies around here need changing. One thing is that you review as a fan of the band. This is a huge mistake.

Here's where you and I certainly disagree. Our whole "philosophy" around here is short and honest. As a fan of a band, I'm going to give you my honest opinion. If you don't like the opinion (aka review) then that's just too damn bad.

No reviewer should be reviewing as a fan, even if it is a critical one. You went into the review with a certain mindset that affected how yous aw it.

That would make perfect sense for somebody that reviewed an album on the first few listens. Doesn't apply to me, though. For such an "open minded" individual, you sure do have some problem grasping simple concepts.

Because it wasn't hte same as other In Flames it wasn't as good. Not only this, you at one point brought in other bands. Huge mistake. A review should not be a comparison.

This is hilarious. People compare stuff all the time. By using the names of bands here and there, people can get it into their minds what a band is going to sound like without actually hearing them. You can sit there and write an entire book on how the guitars of Band X sound, but it's by far more effective to just say, "It sounds like early Bolt Thrower". If that's how it sounds, then that's how it sounds. Plain and simple.

It can have other reccomendations, but that should be separate from the review body.

Um...right...

This killed any real weight I could put into the review.

Unless, of course, I came all over it. It's plain to see you're no different from any other person that makes it a point to contact us because we shit all over one of their favorite bands. You'll go to great lengths to drive the point home how such and such a review sucks. I have yet to receive a complaint for a review that we have graded above a "B".

Not only this, there should be no "old school" to review from. There is one kind of fan of In Flames. And that is it, no old, no new.

I must say...that is an incredibly ignorant way of thinking. Even for an individual such as yourself.

If you liked em from the start you should be able to realize that a band will evolve witht he people in it. They aren't always going to make the same style of music exactly, which is good. As long as they hold to their roots it will still be their music.

Bands should and usually will evolve from their original sound. Some make progress, others go backwards. Just because a band changes doesn't mean you should like it just because they've gone through the effort of changing. That's one of the most moronic things I have ever heard.

Now, also, some things bugged me in there, assumptions. That clayman would be a bad album to get into In Flames from is asnine.

From my viewpoint, this is not their best album. If I was to suggest an album for somebody to get into, I would suggest their best. I would have thought anybody could grasp this concept. Apparently not...

Let me give you a little insight onto my past week and a half. Got my best friend, a bit of a metal head, to listen to In Flames. Loved them, they are now his favourite band. Got one of my other best buds to listen to em, he listened to only Rap and hated metal. He loves In Flames now as well. Got my girlfriend, who listens to about anything, really into them. Got one of my other friends who listened to punk into em. She loves them as well.

Wow. You're so totally radical. Wanna sk8board at the mall?

Now, why do I tell you this? Because what songs got these people into them do you think? The first 6 I send to anyone are as follows: Quiet Place, Cloud Connected, Metaphor, Trigger, Whoracle, and Only for the Weak. Only for the Weak is a favourite of those. It not only got a "d", but was on the album that only an in flames lover could like. Where's the logic I ask?

So because your FRIENDS and yourself liked it means it wrong for me not to like it? You'd make an excellent nazi, I must confess.

There are more examples, but all in all the reviews I've read around here are based too much on old views of bands, set idea's, etc... A review should review with a fully open mind. All that I've read here are reviewed with set minds. Not good.

I can't speak on behalf of everybody here, but I look at everything with an open mind, and just because I hold new works up to previous works does not make me close-minded. It's a simple comparison. Like I've already mentioned...some bands change for the better, some bands don't. In Flames does not. You obviously think otherwise. Case closed. Next!

[Shevy]

Second, I never planned on staying, so no worries about growing on. I came to this site cause a friend was searching for a picture of the Reroute to Remain cover and ended up on the review. Read it, laughed at it, sent it to me, I did the same and figured I'd make a post here(as there is no reviewer e-mail provided).

It sounds like you have awesome friends. Tell the rest of them how much we suck, please.

When I wrote the post I wrote it because, as I do for any review I see on the net, whether it be for a computer game, movie, book, music, or whatever else, the reviewer wrote an uninformed review which stated opinions as facts and used information that was completely false as fact as well. Any respectable site WOULD edit a review or redo it all together if this happened.

Any "respectable" site would leave it in the hands of the reviewer to properly express themselves.

[Shevy]

dangerzone is horatio? And he's a reviewer here? Deffinatly not a good sign if that's what he gives for a first impression.

That's who Horatio is. He's a rude bastard, speaks his mind, and doesn't put up with any shit. He's also an award winning reviewer, not that I expect you to believe me...much less care.

And I like In Flames a lot.

Your ignorant defense of the band kind of gave that away, but thanks for spelling it out for everybody.

It'd be creepy if I were to say something about the band members personal selves. Which I haven't and can't. Their music is however my favourite. And, like anyone (with friends atleast) does, I listen to it around my friends and trade music with them. If that was the creepy part. Or, if it's creepy that I don't like your reviews... like I said, I could care less about what you think of them,

Ha ha! I bet you say that in the same tone of voice as when you say, "I most certainly am NOT sexually attracted to the same gender!"

if you hate em write a review saying "I hate In Flames" and I'll say "Good Job!".

I figured that you weren't exactly blessed with big brains, but I think you're kind of selling yourself short here.

However, it's how your reviews are written that matters. And that's what I complained about.

Thanks for complaining. Please come again!