pretty bland song im sure it will do well just because it's green day
Printable View
pretty bland song im sure it will do well just because it's green day
This song wasn't anything special, very mediocre. I agree with Jakebert though; I liked Warning and this has a similar feel to it. I hope it is just a poor choice of a single, like the song Warning was.
What I liked:
As others have mentioned, it has a very strong Warning influence: sounds like it should have been on the follow up to that album. The whole power-pop thing is just very well suited for the band. I seemed to enjoy it more than anything on 21st Century Breakdown (other than that Peacemaker song).
Disliked:
While it certainly sounds like Warning, it's more like a bside from that album; it's sort of "average sounding". It's also, way, way too long: there is absolutely no reason why it was a second longer than 3 minutes in length. Also, the lyrics were utter shit.
Overall: Average at best: forgettable at worst.
I think the Warning influence is what I liked so much about the guitar riff. If it's an indication of the rest of the album, as well as one of the weakest tracks on the album, then I could like the album, I suppose. It's far more generic/boring than Warning was. But I agree with Rage that the song Warning was one of the weakest on that album, so we'll see.
Edit:
1) The bands and singers I listen to don't call their own music epic. So yeah, it's very strange for me. And arrogant.
2) I have to admit, after second listen, that this song is SO MUCH less obnoxious than the singles from the last two albums. I think its genericness just annoyed me in combination with the arrogance (and this song does not make me feel ready to go party, that's for sure). But we'll see, maybe the album will be decent.
All epic means is that a song is big, grandiose, and cinematic. By this definition, Green Day's last 2 albums could easily be called epic, regardless of whether or not they're good albums, because that are big, grandiose, and cinematic. It can easily be an apt description. While I haven't heard this third album, I could see it meeting that definition, again regardless of quality. Something can be epic sounding and still suck.
Tom DeLonge did not just say Angels and Airways were epic, which they were if you want to get technical. He said they would change the way people listened to music and would be a revolution bigger than U2, Pink Floyd, and the Beatles combined. This is a million times different than simply calling something epic, which is a mere descriptor.
I'm sure at least one band or singer you like has called something they've done epic. I'm sure most musicians have. It's just an incredibly silly thing to criticize a band for.
I'm pretty sure that's what they meant. Actually, I'm pretty sure that's what I said they meant...
Guys, grandiose = Impressive or magnificent in appearance or style, esp. pretentiously so; excessively grand or ambitious. Grandiose has "pretentious" in its definition... how are you actually saying that it's "all epic means"?
Things can be grandiose and also intentionally tacky. I'd consider "Back In Black" a grandiose album yet it's the opposite of pretentious.
Jesus the intro to Oh Love is about the most tedious thing I think I have ever listened to. My brain was going to die if the drums didn't hurry up and go into the inevitable "fast" part after the cheesy opening half time rhythm.
Honestly can't make it through a minute of this song, never mind three albums. Why did Green Day die so hard after Warning? I listened to American Idiot and liked it a lot at the start, it wore on me, that album didn't age well, but there are some nice songs. 21st centectetcetcetcwe'retryingwaytoofuckinghard was so bland it was painful, and I'm not even going to bother listening to these three albums. That kind of investment gets saved for a band that deserves it, Jesus Christ.