First of all, my response wasn't just to your review but also to everybody who doesn't rate Reign In Blood highly. But since you took it that way, I'll focus only on you now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMR
My criticisms of the album are based on facts, that almost all the commenters in this thread have agreed with these facts. Those facts are that 1) the songs are short and often times not fully developed, 2) there is no diversity on the album, 3) there is a lack of melody and harmony, and 4) Tom's vocals don't resonate with me, and his voice often struggles to keep up with the pace of the music. With these facts stated, I fully understand that it for these exact reasons that so many people love this album, and they are the same reasons that it is considered a classic and one of the most important metal albums ever recorded, but that still doesn't mean that it has to work for me.
|
You're right. Maybe I was too harsh or just didn't read carefully enough. And you're also correct that the four facts above are part of why the album is great. But I'll criticize your conclusion by saying that the album features a lot more than just speedy playing and that the facts other than your four are facts that you missed or failed to mention. But hey, like you said, it's your subjective review so no big deal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RMR
Lastly to say that... "you simply don't understand or care about what was going on when it was made"... is an unfair statement.
|
Well, yes, I should have phrased that better. I should have said something like...
My opinion is that people who dislike Reign in Blood and who were not members of the record buying public during the advent of thrash may be incapable of liking the album (or as you would say "incapable of having it resonate with them") because they didn't experience it in the same way that it was experienced by those who were.
But we don't all have the luxury of having been scuzzy pre-teen metalheads when Reign In Blood was unleashed.