Sir Raptor of Nonsense

Why is every Coldpaly discussion in here an either-or argument? Why are we trying to justify the album's sucktitude rather than discuss whether Chris' reaction to reviews is overblown? Of course you can't please everyone, but when people of a respectable class begin to slander your album and exaggerate its lousiness, yeah, I think you have a reason to be 'devastated'. The Rolling Stone review was at least respectable, though, it didn't outline only the bad. The NY review, contrarily, was out-and-out nasty. Even from an impartial view, Coldplay are hardly 'insufferable', though some might get sick of them. That's you being sick of them, not them sickening the whole blamed world. That is, the band is not insufferable. I don't think I can say that much for their self-involved fanbase that argue their biases, whether for or against the album, without discussing any merits beyond personal opinion.

Am I the only one who'd lose faith in the band if they released "Talk" as a single? It's an okay song and everything, but it would just bug me tremendously if they profited from a riff that can't really be called their own -- and I'd technically say the same for "Square One", but at least that one doesn't belong to another band.

Oh, for the love of... is it 'best', or 'favorite'? Those are different words: 'Best' is objective; i.e. "It's hugely overrated, but the instrumentation and sentiment was never so potent as on "Yellow", so that has to be their best song.". "Favorite" is "It may not be that original and the lyrics may suck, but dangit, I enjoy "Swallowed in the Sea" more than any other Coldplay song." I'm going to treat this as a 'best song' topic, hence objectivity: I'd say it's a tie between three songs: "Clocks", "Trouble", and "White Shadows". "Clocks" is spacey and epic in a way that only a Coldplay ballad can be; everyone triumphs and the result is absolutely massive. "White Shadows" also has that sort of critical mass, but it falls on the rockier side of it; everyone is working very, very hard to create something infectious and rythmic. "Trouble" is another species entirely: Intimate and genuine. There's no so-called "overproduction" here(nor is there anywhere in Coldplay's catalogue, but that's anoter topic altogether), it's just a very simple,approach to song that stands very tall and proud, if self-consciously. These are not my very favorites. If they were, you'd see "Swallowed in the Sea", "Everything's Not Lost", "A Rush of Blood to the Head", "A Message", "Don't Panic", and swarms of others, but it's bigger than what my favorite songs are: It's the track(s) that best prove to the public that Coldplay are a very pignant and talented band -- whether or not they like them, it's more an acknowledgement than anything else.

Why are so many people scared of change? Because they're morons. Coldplay fans in particular are a little apalling in this department; we're only on the third album after having made gradual evolutions, and people already want a total return to the Parachutes formula. I mean, I love that formula, but you're just fans. They don't owe you anything, you owe them. So indulge them their experimentation, if they actually wind up going that direction. I guarantee you that if they do, there will be an eventual return to Parachutes' simplicity. They should shuffle into the studio and record a little something before they change their minds, I'd say. Don't just let the idea decay in an idle quotation...

I should point out that the accentuation on the streetlamps and headlights is very clever, proving that the director was at least competent.(Allegedly the wandering bit was Chris' idea to throw in. Not your best, Mr. Martin.)

"White Shadows". I don't think I need to explain why again.

Massive ballad + anthemic quality + shiny textures = Snow Patrol's "Run"

Haven't heard it yet, but I'm impressed that a band in this modern age is actually going to release an album only a year after their first.(Their website claims that "simply and quickly" is the way that "albums should be recorded.") Still, I'm eager. They don't have the talent the Killers have, but they do remind the world that pop-rock can be fun without being annoying or too serious.

Wild -- we must have been watching at the same time. I was impressed that it was "Beautiful Day" and not "City of Blinding Lights", and I was impressed a moment later when "Trouble" appears -- and with a very interesting and, dare I say, unique video. Strange that their musical talents seem to be expanding as their video-related creativity continues to contract... Side point: Insomniac Music Theater sometimes does play that which is not brand new; they played Radiohead's "Creep" last week. It is indeed much better than MTV; no hip-hop to distract you.(Though MTV has Video Mods, which can be pretty entertaining...)

It's sort of like comparing oranges and limes; they're both citrus fruits, but they leave a different taste in your mouth. "The Scientist" is bittersweet, simple, and very genuine. "Fix You" is a more pleasant, and perhaps 'shmaltzy' song, but far less humble; it's a star-reaching tune. Ultimately, "The Scientist". But tack a piano over the organ on "Fix You", and I doubt there'd even be much debate on this matter.

"Such a Rush". Why that track gets a bad rap in this fanbase I'll never get.

Foo Fighters' "In Your Honor" -- one of the better tracks from a somewhat helter-skelter album.

I thought for sure it was going to be U2's The Unforgettable Fire(both for his professed adoration of "A Sort of Homecoming" and the fact that it seems to be the U2 album that Coldplay most consistently resembles). A remarkably nonconformist choice for him; truly a plot twist for the ages.

"Swallowed in the Sea" -- it's a fantastic track if you'll allow yourself to love it.

Yeah, my local station plays full songs, too(unless it's the Cure's "Pictures of You" or Depeche Mode's "Enjoy the Silence", mind you; those are a bit much, even for a laid-back station), but many do not. It just works to their advantage to pare down the length and make it more concise -- more songs can be crammed into X amount of time. I'm curious as to how edited "Fix You" is, though; I'm sure they cut out some of the crescendo, but trimming any amount of the organ intro could only be a good thing...

*sigh* This is exhibit A as to why I'm not keen on music videos. Wandering around trying to make sense of the world as the song plays is cliche. Performing onstage in front of a crowd -- also cliche. I don't just mean Coldplay, I mean EVERYONE -- there's so very little originality left in the video industry. I'll give them credit for not feeling the need to add a busty chick(see the Killers' "All These Things That I've Done"), but it seems there were more profound option available for them. When I heard it was to be a live video, I was at least pelased that the piano would be replaced by the guitar. Of course, they opted to only do the crescendo live -- the only difference between that and its studio counterpart being that you could heard the crowd sing along with the final verse. Chris didn't even add the "Oh oh oh oh oh ohhhhhhhhhhhh" bit. In all, a very disappointing effort for a song that's never been nor will it ever be radio-friendly. Should've gone with "What If", fellas. Or even "Swallowed in the Sea".

Here's the deciding factor: Is your opinion identical to that of Coldplay themselves?

I'd say that "A rush of Blood to the Head" is easily one of the best best on there. That new riff Jonny added really was a potent concoction. Oh, though there is "Life is For Living"... and "Don't Panic"... and, heck, I think they left some of the most impressive songs off the audio CD altogether...

Of what's listed, "A Message"("What If" wouldn't be a single back-to-back with "Fix You"), but my money still rests with "White Shadows". And "Til Kingdom Come" will certainly never see singledom... well, unless they slapped a sticker on the cover that lets everyone know "Til Kingdom Come" is in fact on the album, but still, I'm not sure the band are even considering it their song. Still, I'll eat my hat if it's not "White Shadows". Er, provided the aht in question isn't my sombrero. Those things just don't agree with me.

Parachutes - **** ~ Fragile and brimming with potential, it's the debut album to end debut albums. A Rush of Blood to the Head - *** ~ Weak in the knees, I expect this to go down as my least favorite Coldplay album of all time, it's a strong whole but very questionable in pieces. Songs need to stand alone and together to make an album truly worthwhile. X&Y - ***** ~ Ambitious and powerful, this is certainly their best effort to date. The emotional frailty remains, but it's more subtle now against the massive arrangements.

It's a finicky public that the music industry has to deal with. As soon as a band emerges on top, everyone clamors that they've lost their former luster, they're too poppy, they should be challenging the public rather than playing it by numbers(yeah, people always love something new, right?), all that crap. Some have taken to saying these things now, and by the fourth album's release, you can expect a lot more of the same. That's why it's simplest to live by this simple creed: The band can record what they want to. If people like it they like it, if they don't, they don't. Bands should play more for themselves than anybody else -- even the hardcore fans. The alternative is to lack enthusiasm for what they're doing, and that could only make things worse.

The Killers' "Everything Will Be All Right"(remember, folks, just because the Killers spell it 'alright', does not make it a real word.). It seems the most embarrassing thing on all of Hot Fuss, but you gotta credit them for trying to write a dirge...

That could hardly be the fan abbreveation the boys had in mind for that song...

Why is this topic still going? Jacob gave you the reason -- it's about marketing. Virtually every band does this, which is why the lead single and the opening track are often one and the same. Start of with a splash, then end with more of a sprinkle.