4:13 and The Cure are boring, forgettable albums that have nothing new to add to the back band's catalogue, just repetitions of the same formulas that used to work. I would never have gave them even a second listening if Bob wasn't singing on them. And even with him singing...
Just my opinion, of course.
Well The Cure and 4:13 Dream are never going to be lauded as the band's best work though I have seen the very occasional fan rank the self titled very high.
Both albums would be low on my list too but I certainly wouldn't say they "suck and have only 2 good songs". For me, they are a mixed bag of some excellent, some good, some average, occasional stinker songs. The production on both don't help the listening experience. 7/10 albums in my opinion.
As far as repetitions of previous work, there is a bit of evidence of that. I admit feeling "you gotta be kidding me" when I first heard Taking Off with it's JLH similarities.
Last Edit: Dec 6, 2019 13:38:07 GMT 1 by mralphabet
Were you the one who posted hoping they won't release a new album again?
Yes I was. Based on what I feel are evidences. But also stated that I would be extremely happy to be wrong. Unfortunately, I don't think that Robert Smith 'has it' anymore. I've already said this quite a few times in this forum. I don't even think 'Bloodflowers' is a classic album, not in a million years. I think their last good record is Wish, and still far from being perfect. So, based on those premises, it's hard for me to think that after 28 years, they are going suddenly to deliver a masterpiece. But again, I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.
Regarding Roger, it could have been extremely surprising to hear him stating that their next record it's going to be crap.
Were you the one who posted hoping they won't release a new album again?
Yes I was. Based on what I feel are evidences. But also stated that I would be extremely happy to be wrong. Unfortunately, I don't think that Robert Smith 'has it' anymore. I've already said this quite a few times in this forum. I don't even think 'Bloodflowers' is a classic album, not in a million years. I think their last good record is Wish, and still far from being perfect. So, based on those premises, it's hard for me to think that after 28 years, they are going suddenly to deliver a masterpiece. But again, I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.
Regarding Roger, it could have been extremely surprising to hear him stating that their next record it's going to be crap.
Back in 2004 just before the self titled album was released, a friend of mine emailed Roger asking him about the new album. Roger replied saying it wasn't great compared to their previous albums. He was very frank about it rather than trying to big it up!
Does Robert still "have it"? I believe he does but the difference now to peak cure 1980-1992 when he was the greatest songwriter of his generation and produced the best run of albums of the 80's, he was incapable of writing a bad song. Even what I consider to be the 1 turkey in the 80-92 period, Wendy Time, came from Simon rather than Robert. In recent times he can still write quality songs but not every song is a winner. Also him having final tracklisting choice has not always resulted in the best songs from the sessions making the album. I'd say something like "Underneath The Stars" is as good as anything he's ever written.
WMS was a prime example of trying to do a varied KMKMKM part 2. The difference being in that the 24 KMKMKM songs are all great but the 20 WMS songs are of differing qualities.
Ok you're not enthralled about Bloodflowers, there are some fans who feel the same. But it's highly regarded by a lot of other fans, as seen in reaching quite a high position in the recent album game. I think it came 8th just below Wish/Head but above The Top/3ib. Personally I'd place it about 6th, it's definitely classic later Cure in my book. The best Cure in my opinion is 1980 to 1992 + 2000.
Last Edit: Dec 6, 2019 15:40:04 GMT 1 by mralphabet
Yes I was. Based on what I feel are evidences. But also stated that I would be extremely happy to be wrong. Unfortunately, I don't think that Robert Smith 'has it' anymore. I've already said this quite a few times in this forum. I don't even think 'Bloodflowers' is a classic album, not in a million years. I think their last good record is Wish, and still far from being perfect. So, based on those premises, it's hard for me to think that after 28 years, they are going suddenly to deliver a masterpiece. But again, I hope I'm wrong. Time will tell.
Regarding Roger, it could have been extremely surprising to hear him stating that their next record it's going to be crap.
Back in 2004 just before the self titled album was released, a friend of mine emailed Roger asking him about the new album. Roger replied saying it wasn't great compared to their previous albums. He was very frank about it rather than trying to big it up!
Does Robert still "have it"? I believe he does but the difference now to peak cure 1980-1992 when he was the greatest songwriter of his generation and produced the best run of albums of the 80's, he was incapable of writing a bad song. In recent times he can still write quality songs but not every song is a winner. Also him having final tracklisting choice has not always resulted in the best songs from the sessions making the album. I'd say something like "Underneath The Stars" is as good as anything he's ever written.
WMS was a prime example of trying to do a varied KMKMKM part 2. The difference being in that the 24 KMKMKM songs are all great but the 20 WMS songs are of differing qualities.
Ok you're not enthralled about Bloodflowers, there are some fans who feel the same. But it's highly regarded by a lot of other fans, as seen in reaching quite a high position in the recent album game. I think it came 8th just below Wish/Head but above The Top/3ib. Personally I'd place it about 6th, it's definitely classic later Cure in my book. The best Cure in my opinion is 1980 to 1992 + 2000.
I call BS. I don't believe a professional musician like Roger would throw RS under the bus in "an email" in terms of a project in the works.
Back in 2004 just before the self titled album was released, a friend of mine emailed Roger asking him about the new album. Roger replied saying it wasn't great compared to their previous albums. He was very frank about it rather than trying to big it up!
Does Robert still "have it"? I believe he does but the difference now to peak cure 1980-1992 when he was the greatest songwriter of his generation and produced the best run of albums of the 80's, he was incapable of writing a bad song. In recent times he can still write quality songs but not every song is a winner. Also him having final tracklisting choice has not always resulted in the best songs from the sessions making the album. I'd say something like "Underneath The Stars" is as good as anything he's ever written.
WMS was a prime example of trying to do a varied KMKMKM part 2. The difference being in that the 24 KMKMKM songs are all great but the 20 WMS songs are of differing qualities.
Ok you're not enthralled about Bloodflowers, there are some fans who feel the same. But it's highly regarded by a lot of other fans, as seen in reaching quite a high position in the recent album game. I think it came 8th just below Wish/Head but above The Top/3ib. Personally I'd place it about 6th, it's definitely classic later Cure in my book. The best Cure in my opinion is 1980 to 1992 + 2000.
I call BS. I don't believe a professional musician like Roger would throw RS under the bus in "an email" in terms of a project in the works.
Charming! Call it what you want but Roger was not praising The Cure 2004 album. He didn't say it was awful, just that it wasn't up there with their best albums.
And that is generally how The Cure album is regarded by most.
Last Edit: Dec 6, 2019 15:51:16 GMT 1 by mralphabet
I call BS. I don't believe a professional musician like Roger would throw RS under the bus in "an email" in terms of a project in the works.
Charming! Call it what you want but Roger was not praising The Cure 2004 album. He didn't say it was awful, just that it wasn't up there with their best albums.
And that is generally how The Cure album is regarded by most.
I think you were implying Roger was speaking poorly about it, but it's easy to backpedal and try to mince words, now.
What you are saying just doesn't make any sense in terms of something someone would likely say in regards to their career over an email.
Charming! Call it what you want but Roger was not praising The Cure 2004 album. He didn't say it was awful, just that it wasn't up there with their best albums.
And that is generally how The Cure album is regarded by most.
I think you were implying Roger was speaking poorly about it, but it's easy to backpedal and try to mince words, now.
What you are saying just doesn't make any sense in terms of something someone would likely say in regards to their career over an email.
Roger used to interact with fans a lot in those days, I don't know if he still does now. He was just being honest about how he felt about The Cure album in contrast to Robert's usual "our best album" line.. That's why hearing how much Roger is praising their new "epic" music makes me feel confident the new album is going to be wonderful.
we should be careful with the expectations. the endless delays are worrisome. older bands putting out new material is tricky. for example, check out the new who album. one word review: meh! there's a few good songs but they are way outnumbered by the mediocre. word is pete & roger were never even in the same studio during the recording. & it shows with the final product. i like "bloodflowers" but am lukewarm at best with 4:13 & cure. when i listen to the cure, it is never those 2. & those were the most recent. the one thing that gives a bit of hope is the participation of Reeves Gabrels. he certainly gave the live thing a shot in the arm. we'll hope that his work is very present in the new material & not buried in the mix.
we should be careful with the expectations. the endless delays are worrisome. older bands putting out new material is tricky. for example, check out the new who album. one word review: meh! there's a few good songs but they are way outnumbered by the mediocre. word is pete & roger were never even in the same studio during the recording. & it shows with the final product. i like "bloodflowers" but am lukewarm at best with 4:13 & cure. when i listen to the cure, it is never those 2. & those were the most recent. the one thing that gives a bit of hope is the participation of Reeves Gabrels. he certainly gave the live thing a shot in the arm. we'll hope that his work is very present in the new material & not buried in the mix.
Tricky for sure. We already know Robert has been having writers block in recent years. However it's also easy to fix on one particular sound/era to be the best and declare anything else as a downhill slide. Everyone has a different take on what's good/bad. I like 4:13, Bloodflowers and WMS actually. The only album I find unlistenable is the self titled -- every few years I go back and try again but it still sounds shrill and phoned-in to me. But the experimentation with things that might not be so successful keeps them engaging as more than a nostalgia band.
There's an unevenness (except probably Bloodflowers and Disintegration) to everything since, maybe, KMKMKM? It was my absolute favorite album ever in the late 80s but looking back now I think it would've been better as a single album. Maybe they should be putting out slightly more curated EPs now? Or just release everything as a single...people can choose to listen -- or not.
Would've loved that dark album for Christmas but I think we'll be lucky to see it at all. Right now I'm just hoping for a resolution to whatever happened to Simon so they can do some live gigs in 2020. On that front, at least, they just get better with years.
It would be so perfect if you would just fall out the window
we should be careful with the expectations. the endless delays are worrisome. older bands putting out new material is tricky. for example, check out the new who album. one word review: meh! there's a few good songs but they are way outnumbered by the mediocre. word is pete & roger were never even in the same studio during the recording. & it shows with the final product. i like "bloodflowers" but am lukewarm at best with 4:13 & cure. when i listen to the cure, it is never those 2. & those were the most recent. the one thing that gives a bit of hope is the participation of Reeves Gabrels. he certainly gave the live thing a shot in the arm. we'll hope that his work is very present in the new material & not buried in the mix.
Tricky for sure. We already know Robert has been having writers block in recent years. However it's also easy to fix on one particular sound/era to be the best and declare anything else as a downhill slide. Everyone has a different take on what's good/bad. I like 4:13, Bloodflowers and WMS actually. The only album I find unlistenable is the self titled -- every few years I go back and try again but it still sounds shrill and phoned-in to me. But the experimentation with things that might not be so successful keeps them engaging as more than a nostalgia band.
There's an unevenness (except probably Bloodflowers and Disintegration) to everything since, maybe, KMKMKM? It was my absolute favorite album ever in the late 80s but looking back now I think it would've been better as a single album. Maybe they should be putting out slightly more curated EPs now? Or just release everything as a single...people can choose to listen -- or not.
Would've loved that dark album for Christmas but I think we'll be lucky to see it at all. Right now I'm just hoping for a resolution to whatever happened to Simon so they can do some live gigs in 2020. On that front, at least, they just get better with years.
I, too, selfishly worry that there might not be live shows any time next year depending on what Simon's personal situation is. Granted, Eden did a fantastic job pinch hitting on two occasions, but I think many would be upset if the lineup changed in that way consistently.
The idea of releasing singles rather than an album is something I just can't entertain. I know I'm a dinosaur but I strongly hold on to the idea that the album format means something in terms of how we digest music. "Think of The Wall, man, think of The Wall!" I wouldn't think TC would ever do that, but I guess stranger things have happened.
Sorry, no offense to Eden, he was a champ this year, but other than Robert there is one band member, in my humble opinion that is NOT replaceable and that is Simon! It's a horrible thing to think about them not doing gigs. It's an "I'm sticking my finger in my ear la la la la" thought but no Simon no Cure. My opinion.
Sorry, no offense to Eden, he was a champ this year, but other than Robert there is one band member, in my humble opinion that is NOT replaceable and that is Simon! It's a horrible thing to think about them not doing gigs. It's an "I'm sticking my finger in my ear la la la la" thought but no Simon no Cure. My opinion.
Exactly. I've been thinking about the period between 1982-84 when Simon was out of the band, and it was more like the Robert Smith solo project. I love love love that period but it's a different thing. You can hear the lights come back on in the Cure house when Head on the Door comes out... anyway Eden has his own band, he sounded terrific in Mexico City ... so Simon has to be there :-)
It would be so perfect if you would just fall out the window
New album will be released sometime soon(er or later) Live events will come up (except IF something will go really wrong/bad) And yes Pipperoo Simon Is The Man!