THE LUCID DREAMHeartbreak Girl/I Feel So Lonesome (I’m Blue For You)
Holy Are You
I have absolutely no problem with a band wearing their influences on its sleeve as long as they inject a little of themseles into the proceedings, or least drive the point home by sheer “I really mean it” exuberance; this band does neither. The Lucid Dream is clearly mining the shoegaze/drone format that’s heavily favoured by “the kids” today and it’s a style that tends to bore me to tears when it becomes too derivative.
‘Heartbreak Girl’ isn’t a bad song and makes some interesting twists and turns but relies way too heavily on aping The Jesus & Mary Chain. In the interim the band appears to have abandoned the idea of having a personality of its own. The flip seems to be a stab at a lysergic Roky Erickson/Elevators type ballad which really falls short of the mark, marred further by the singer’s overly psychedelic warbling.
Eric Colin Reidelberger
'The Lucid Dream is clearly mining the shoegaze/drone format that’s heavily favoured by “the kids” today'
ReplyDeleteWhat an idiotic assumption to make.
how is that "idiotic"? If the shoe fits... It's bad form for a label to react to criticism and makes you look like shmoes. Hows THAT for idiotic?
ReplyDeleteI concur Derek. If it hadn't come from the label, maybe. But... If you can't handle criticism don't release records.
ReplyDeleteQuite simply, a review giving a band a hard time over nothing but guesswork.
ReplyDeleteA 2 minute background look into who the band are & the whole review is rendered pointless.
It's not hard to find out that The Lucid Dream have never been a band, in any of their previous forms, for "the kids".
Weird, weird review.
Wow,what a way to gloriously miss a point.
ReplyDeleteA bad review is no problem whatsoever,it's the very nature of releasing records. This is no bad review though,this is a snidey,presumptuous dig. The Lucid Dream are a band who have been passionately buying Psychedelia for years, and making such music for the best part of 10 years. To say the band are doing it to latch onto some bandwagon is insulting.
I'm not supposed to defend a band on my label? Is that some kind of industry rule? Give a shit, either way we're shifting records and defending against a snidey dig isn't going to affect people buying it.
It's Shindig who are going to lose subscriptions by employing such lazy journos. A publication I would have thought should know better.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI suppose some people would choose to investigate a band they find as stale as old toast only to discover that they've been around for a staggering 10 years and are still working the middle of the road.
ReplyDeleteMust have been an oversight on my part or maybe I am inherently lazy.
I would suggest that you try to get your head around the fact that I merely didn't like it and it really wasn't that scathing of a review.
Honestly, you acting as if we are discussing Pet Sounds or some other magnum opus rather than a two song single.
Thicker skin might be in order for you and in the future I shall try to spend more time with the mediocre.
Love, Peace and Cotton Candy
Eric
See if you didn't like it, why didn't you just say?
ReplyDeleteThat would have been far more useful for those who hadn't heard it instead of the fables you created about a bands past & reason of being.
Like I said, a weird, weird review for a magazine far more worthy than the stuff you fabricated.
Peace indeed.
Sorry, Eric, but anyone who is reduced to sarcastic comment is not gonna get a lot of respect. I back the label guy's comment fully. He speaks well, with clarity and conviction, and very little reaction. The whole nature of your response is demeaning and only YOU look bad. Sometimes we just need to take a step back, and swallow some criticism without reacting in a manner that shows no maturity. And so few people realize that the power of apology is one of the great 'warrior traits', much like forgiveness.
ReplyDelete