The Smiley Smile Message Board

Apologies if posted elsewhere:

Brian Wilson’s 11th solo studio album opens just as you’d hope a Brian Wilson album to open: with mournful piano chords, a muted trumpet, lush harmonies and Wilson singing about his desire to hold on to the feeling of a beautiful day. One terrible misstep aside – Runaway Dancer, which sounds like Wilson trying to recreate house music as described to him by Alan Partridge – No Pier Pressure doesn’t bother trying to sound current, instead aiming to attract casual listeners with special guests, not all of whom complement Wilson: On the Island, with She & Him, turns out to be a slightly sickly piece of whimsy. The best collaborative tracks feature former Beach Boys – Al Jardine, David Marks and Blondie Chaplin pop up in varying combinations – but the best song closes the record. The Last Song, originally earmarked for Lana Del Rey, sounds like Wilson is reflecting on his former group, and acknowledging that his career is at an end – “Don’t be sad / There was a time and place for what we had” – over a wonderful arrangement and a desperately sad melody. There are worse places to end a recording career, if that’s what The Last Song is trying to tell us.

There's a thread for reviews. Starting a new one for such a sparse, negative review seems...pointless?

Disappointing to see regardless. Most of the negative reviews tend to be very vague...like the reviewer had one listen and only mentioned the songs they could remember the names of

I know there is a thread for board member reviews but didn`t realise there is one for professional reviews. If the mods want to delete this thread and move it there then that is fine.

Nah..this is fine.

Thread, not the review. And yes, this reads like the guy listened to maybe 30 seconds of each song, wrote some notes down, then went to the next one.

No matter if you like the song or not, that's a pretty funny description!

That`s actually the main reason I posted the review.   :-D

I haven't heard anything from NPP yet (will wait until I have the CD at home).

That said: this, as yet brief, thread made me think, for it raises a point about our own day and age.

How do people (reviewers, we) perceive records? Do we give them time? Does the phrase 'grow on you' mean anything any more? Or does superficiality (in terms of paying attention, time) have the upper hand?

I mean: I find that remark about Alan Partridge funny... at first sight. But then: does the reviewer have any sense or knowledge about BW's peculiar sense of humour?

Which led me to this question: how would Love You be received, were it released now?

I must say I fear the worst. And it is one of my perennial favourites.

Personally I think Love You would receive mixed reviews today, just as it did in 1977. To me it's a timeless classic but I'm aware not everyone feels this way and that's fine. NPP is a very different album, much more polished and less eccentric. Personally I can't get into Runaway Dancer but maybe I'll be able to enjoy it sometime in the future, you never know. I love BW's sense of humor but can't detect any of it in Runaway Dancer. Maybe it's there and I'll realize it in a couple of weeks, months, or years. As for the critic, I think he did a decent job, though it's a fairly short and standard review, nothing special really.

Can't really bring myself to care what Michael Hann thinks, but was surprised that he's written such a short review.

It gets four stars in the Daily Mail -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/reviews/article-3023969/Beach-Boy-belting-vibrations-Brian-Wilson-s-new-album-perfect-harmony-writes-ADRIAN-THRILLS.html

I'm finishing up a book on Purple Rain. During one section, the author points out that a review of the album is released a month after the album, because back then critics were expected to spend a little time with the records before reviewing them, unlike today where we want it NOW.

I kind of wonder when reading many a review...not just THIS one...what exactly reviewers are attempting to accomplish.

I don't think INFORM is always the case....certainly NOT goal # 1.  I also wonder how many 'reviewers' are qualified to review the item at hand...be it a movie, a book, a piece of art...or an album.  If one can't relate to the artist, the intended audience, context etc...then he or she shouldn't be given the assignment as it only makes the reviewer look like a dink and the publication like it's out of touch with the pulse and the beat of the target audience.

All too often I get the impression that the ONLY real intention of way too many a reviewer is merely to 'impress' their fellow reviewers.  Sure as shootin' all too often they come nowhere near impressing me.  [unless the aim of their game is to instill the fact that they're communicating directly out of their asses. :lol]

I think the real intention for most reviewers is to get THEIR name in print and get paid, so the more short/sweet reviews they do, the better.