What do you like about it?

What do you not like about it?

 

I like all of its songs, it's one of my favorite albums.

If I could change one thing, I would have the guitar solos do a little more; be a little more experimental.

Views: 281

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

Mike, well put once again.

Mike Elliott said:
I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

BUUUUUUUUUUUURN.

 

WOW man really you're going to attack me now because i'm breaking down everything I don't like with your precious Green album? All i've done is clearly detailed why I don't think this album is "perfection", yet still proclaiming I enjoy a few tracks. I have repeatedly said time and time again that I'm not bagging on anyone here. if you don't like what i'm saying then, I don't know, DON'T READ WHAT I'M WRITING. Either that, or suck it up and just accept it. I'm not trying to convince you one way or another, I'm simply discussing a Weezer album at length. I'm not shooting down what anyone is saying, I'm simply defending my point of view because I thought this was a place for discussion on Weezer (good or bad). If not then go ahead try to flame me. Because you're responses so far in this discussion have been brilliant, thoughtful, and best of all witty!  You get an A for all your effort! Gold star for you! Cheers!

 

Oh, and Rivers already wrote the perfect album. Twice in fact. He certainly doesn't need my help good sir!


Anyway, if anyone else would like to have a discussion  on the Green album and Star Wars without challenging me to some sort of songwriting duel then let's chat. I'm here for both the camaraderie and the respectful debate. Peace shalom, purple mountains, and such ya'll.

Mike Elliott said:

I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

 This is a terrible argument....... "You can't make a better album than Rivers, so you can't bash it". Yeah, I'm also not getting paid millions of dollars to do something.  We are fans and critics. Thats what we do and we have every right to do it. Especially seeing how Rivers HAS made two near perfect albums (TBA and Pinkerton), we have every right to say that TGA was a weak outing for the band. Its their job. You can say its about art, but the Music business is also just that, a business and Weezer is making a product for us. If we don't like the product, we can say so, because we want a better product.  When your car breaks down in the middle of the road for no reason, you blame the car manufacturer even if you can't make a car. I may not be able to make an album better than TGA, but I can still criticize it for its flaws. Its just a terrible argument. I don't even hate the TGA, (I'm actually pretty sure know one in this topic has said they hated it) but we can still mention its flaws. That doesn't mean you can't like it. As I said earlier, I love ROTS even though I whole-heartedly recognize it as a terribly flawed film.

Mike Elliott said:
I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

Good statement.

I think the only bad thing about this argument, is that we are arguing about each others opinions.

Instead, we should be debating the album, not our opinions.

Everyone on this thread has made good points.

bleedgoldandwhite21 said:

 This is a terrible argument....... "You can't make a better album than Rivers, so you can't bash it". Yeah, I'm also not getting paid millions of dollars to do something.  We are fans and critics. Thats what we do and we have every right to do it. Especially seeing how Rivers HAS made two near perfect albums (TBA and Pinkerton), we have every right to say that TGA was a weak outing for the band. Its their job. You can say its about art, but the Music business is also just that, a business and Weezer is making a product for us. If we don't like the product, we can say so, because we want a better product.  When your car breaks down in the middle of the road for no reason, you blame the car manufacturer even if you can't make a car. I may not be able to make an album better than TGA, but I can still criticize it for its flaws. Its just a terrible argument. I don't even hate the TGA, (I'm actually pretty sure know one in this topic has said they hated it) but we can still mention its flaws. That doesn't mean you can't like it. As I said earlier, I love ROTS even though I whole-heartedly recognize it as a terribly flawed film.

Mike Elliott said:
I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

It's true you didn't attack my opinions. You had rebuttles for everyone of my arguments. I'm still waiting to here what you think of my opinions on ROTS.

johnny rockets said:

BUUUUUUUUUUUURN.

 

WOW man really you're going to attack me now because i'm breaking down everything I don't like with your precious Green album? All i've done is clearly detailed why I don't think this album is "perfection", yet still proclaiming I enjoy a few tracks. I have repeatedly said time and time again that I'm not bagging on anyone here. if you don't like what i'm saying then, I don't know, DON'T READ WHAT I'M WRITING. Either that, or suck it up and just accept it. I'm not trying to convince you one way or another, I'm simply discussing a Weezer album at length. I'm not shooting down what anyone is saying, I'm simply defending my point of view because I thought this was a place for discussion on Weezer (good or bad). If not then go ahead try to flame me. Because you're responses so far in this discussion have been brilliant, thoughtful, and best of all witty!  You get an A for all your effort! Gold star for you! Cheers!

 

Oh, and Rivers already wrote the perfect album. Twice in fact. He certainly doesn't need my help good sir!


Anyway, if anyone else would like to have a discussion  on the Green album and Star Wars without challenging me to some sort of songwriting duel then let's chat. I'm here for both the camaraderie and the respectful debate. Peace shalom, purple mountains, and such ya'll.

Mike Elliott said:

I have disagreed with your points the first nineteen times....No need to go for twenty....You can say the same thing over and over again and it's just as meaningless as the first.  Maybe you can make the perfect album.  That I would like to hear.  Perhaps you can show Rivers how it's done. 

Yes listening to a record where tracks 5-10 sound almost exactly the same (amongst all of the other cons I listed) makes for a boring listen. But the melodies and pure catchiness of it all makes it enjoyable at least to that extent, especially when the songs are listened to individually as opposed to in succession. That's why I neither hate it nor love it, it is what it is. To me it's Rivers settling - trying just enough to make it accessible, but holding a lot back from creating a true classic album.

 

So why have I, and still listen to a "boring" record 10 years later? Because Weezer is my favorite band and despite all of their flaws I can enjoy every single one of their albums.

 

Look, it's like Rivers heard Sugar Ray's song "Rivers" (which was created as an ode to Weezer) and designed an album (sans Hash Pipe and Island) in a similar vein (simply taking all the things people generalize a Weezer song to be and there it is). We all know Rivers was trying to hone his perfect pop-rock song craft during this era, and while I can respect that, I don't necessarily think making an entire album in that fashion was the best way to go about it. I'm not bashing Green, I'm just saying there's so much more that could have been done. Take for instance, as I previously mentioned, the Japanese cover of Smile. See what they did with that arrangement there, and the solos. I know Rivers and co are capable of that, and it just bothers me that they settled for the most basic of pop-rock formulas. To me, the only songs that get a pass for using the "perfect pop song" formula are Photograph, Hash Pipe, Island, and O Girlfriend.

 

 

Mike Elliott said:

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.   I was quite taken back that you find it a "boring listen".  If something was boring to me I would not listen to it hundreds of times....I'd be....Bored.  

johnny rockets said:

I've listened to the Green album hundreds of times and unfortunately it's still, for the most part, a boring listen. Sarah, you said that it sounds like Blue meets Pinkerton. I'm sorry, I don't hear this at all. If anything, they took the Blue sound and regressed it to a basic pop formula . Not necessarily terrible or anything, just not a fulfilling listen in my opinion. The Beatles wrote songs like this in their early releases, and The Strokes have been known to be pretty redundant in their song structures as well.

 

I was just as excited as anyone that this album was coming out. I was 3 years into my fandom and could not believe Weezer was finally releasing a new album in the first place. But after I got through it, I was just sort of empty, like "that was it?". And back then, I wasn't alone in this reaction either. Weezer had changed, and while some of it was good, there was a lot missing.

 

Cons:

-Rivers monotone nasally emotionless singing

-Rivers doing all of the background vocals

-Guitar solos are just the verse melody

-A lack of variety in song structure (verse, chorus, verse, chorus, solo, chorus and/or verse)

-A lack of dynamics in the production

-Tracks 5-10 basically use all of the same chords and sound nearly identical

-Lack of clever, interesting, autobiographical, and thoughtful lyrics in majority of the songs (Rivers admitted he doesn't even know what some of the words mean, for instance, in Don't Let Go)

 

Pros:

-The melodies and hooks

-Photograph, Island in the Sun, Smile, O Girlfriend (and on some days Hash Pipe)

 

I like the Green album enough, and can appreciate the simplicity of the pop-rock occasionally. But whereas some deem it Weezer's 3rd or 4th best, I just don't hear it. If these songs come on individually on my ipod, they're a fun listen. But together, they almost appear generic. Honestly, if Rivers wanted to rerecord this album, in the vein of Don't Let Go 2005 or Smile on piano (or like the Japanese tribute version which is the quintessential version of that song), I'd be all for it. The melodies are solid (some even great), but the songs themselves though are just a bit undercooked.

 

If you were a fan prior to the Green album's release, what was your reaction to the album then, and what are your feelings today 10 years later?

"rebuttles" lol
did i spell it wrong?

▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ said:
"rebuttles" lol
Rebuttals.

Scott Alan Perkins said:
did i spell it wrong?

▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓ said:
"rebuttles" lol

Well without the synth it would be the better version.

The original is perfection in the sense that it fits perfectly within The Green Album structure (pure power-pop).

 

I think the 2005 version, Smile on Piano, O Girlfriend w/ the new solo, Island in the Sun (acoustic).. some b-sides and a more Pinkerton-esque sound would make a better album of course.


johnny rockets said:

Just curious, because hey it's your opinion, but what's perfect about the original Don't Let Go? To me Rivers isn't even trying to sing with any kind of emotion whatsoever. The guitars are driving, and that's cool, but there's nothing special there. Personally it sounds like a very compressed and "going through the motions" kind of recording. The 2005 version, however, just enhances the song in every way. Despite Rivers saying the lyrics don't mean anything, in the 2005 version it sounds like they do because of the way he's singing it. Also there's that synth, the bridge, just a lot of fantastic things going on.

Aus Untoured Since '96 said:
I don't know why everyone's obsession with the 2005 version of Don't Let Go.
I think the original version is perfection and that AOL one just seems empty...

Though I definitely agree that the live version of O Girlfriend w/ the new solo is epic.
But that doesn't answer the question, dude.

ѾѾѾѾѾѾѾѾѾ said:

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Weezer Bootlegs

SOCIAL

  • Weezer Links

Weezer Mailing List

Music

Loading…

© 2014   Created by Weezer.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Offline

Live Video