|
Review Navigator   FeaturesContestsReviews
 | Face To FaceHow To Ruin Everything2002 Vagrant 
  Review by: Scott See others by this writer ![[staff]](/images/icons/staffsticker.gif){kind=icon}
Face To Face (link) Only registered users can post comments 
 
Published on April 9th 2002
Similiarities and differences. People who liked this also liked:           Please login or register to post comments. What are the benefits of having a Punknews.org account?
I didn't think this was very good when I first heard it but after listening to it for a couple of weeks I really like it, it's not as good as don't turn away or big choice but it's solid and has some great songs. Give it a go. You guys should appreciate the fact that the album is so clear--they tracked it live in the studio! That's right, they didn't record each instrument separately, so sound levels,etc. could be changed, they recorded all the instruments at once! There, I'm done...what, no I'm not. It must be pointed out again that people aren't bitching about his opinion, they are bitching about how this review killed their brain cells. Face to face is the best band ever "ruined music" How to Ruin Everything? Face to Face ruined music by releasing this album. The ep was much better than the album. They should have sold that and gave the full length away. Fucking A some of you are absolutely retarded. Most people aren't pissed that the reviewer didn't like the album. It was the manner in which it was reviewed, OK??? It was the comparing and contrasting with a BAD RELIGION album and NOT taking the album on it's own terms. It's not even like this turd compared it to an old Face to Face record; that I might understand, yet not agree with. He compared face to face with a TOTALLY different band, and attached his "never been impressed" attitude to the review. The kid is a moron; that much is clear. Love the record or hate it, what intelligent human being would write that sort of review? None. This is the same shit heel who starts school reports with "Websters dictionary defines _______ as..." because they are too vacant to come up with something original. Again, it isn't because the review is negative. It's because it isn't a decent review. It's just so poorly written and based in nothing but the writers own agenda. It's hackneyed (shocking, huh?) and ill-informed, not to mention moronic. ok the album is pretty weak overall, but that was expected. I do however think the reviews reads like it was written by someone in grade 4. fuck this gay album. "uh oh you haven't listened to their older stuff" fuck that. scott is reviewing this album, not the band. he has the right to say this album fucking sucks, and if you don't like it go make your own review and send it to him. just like how the process of belief went, there were like 3 reviews of that album. "uh oh you don't understand how great they were" man fuck that give it a break. we all have different taste. Eegad. Most of you people suck. Since when has Face to face been a sacred cow? Their last few albums have been progressively worse. Now they release something that's a little bit better, and everyone's supposed to eat the shit and call it popcorn? I hate you guys. With every ounce of my heart, I hate you guys. Never mind teh fact that you're freaking out like chipmunks on amphetemines over someone's OPINION. Seriously, If you don't like it, that's fine, but it's no reason to crap your courduroys. I've seen some seriously worse reviews on this site, that didn't even begin to get into explaining why the album was bad liek scott did. It's a negative opinion of the album. It happens. I'm just glad that it's a negative opinion that was backed up with some reasons for the low rating. Most of you should eat some shit or something. Then you can go back to McDonalds, ask your boss for some extra hours, and take out your insecurities on some customers. Fucking hippies. eat shit and die. Yes, folks, Face To Face rules. Hey daegan,get your head out of your ass-olpunker- Yes, folks, Face To Face is horrible. p.s.s.s..s.s.s.s.s saying someone shouldn't review a certain band because they like "emo", or because they like "indie" is BS. i'm a big pedro the lion fan, but i really like some of the older strung out. the new album is more mellow, which is kind of a bummer. but omg look i've heard their old stuff! and i even like it!! who is driving car??!?! bear is driving car?!? how can this be?? p.s. i agree with scott -- it was the same standard face to face format, but really polished..which i guess you'd like if you were a face to face fan? but it's pretty boring. i just liked the mid-end of the cd. -ermac i find it silly that in order to appreciate THIS cd, i need to go and buy 4 or 5 more so i can "understand" their "sound." waaaht the hell? a review sure as hell can compare to older sounds of the band, but it sure as hell doesn't have to. case in point, i don't like much bad religion, but the new album is pretty sweet. i don't want to listen to the new face to face and say "wow! this sucks shit! well, unless i factor in the fact that they used to suck even more.." I don't hate everything on Vagrant. I love the new Anniversary disc, I can't wait to see what the band will do next. The Hey Mercedes CD is pretty darn good, too. It's just most of their stuff recently has been subpar. Don't blame me, blame the label. Scott Alright I just got this cd and have to say that scott got it EXACTLYY right. There was nothing else I would have added to this review. I could have taken the Bad Religion shit out but other than that Scott had the right idea about the whole thing!!!-pat41 Oh god....as I don't make any sense at all.....alright......we need something that breaks new ground...musically....yes.....there we go.....and this album...does not do that..at all...in any way shape or form...yes I'm done.... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH DUDE THATS GREAT!!! Scott that review was lovely; really it was; dead on.....best album EVER!!!! *hangs head in shame* Face to Face has fallen into the what-everyone-else-is pit; We need to something to break ground..... Okay, here's my new review. Hope you all approve: scott--i think you hit the nail on the head here...this is a crappy album; as was Ignorance is Bliss....I have their self titled album--its alright....I mean its rocking.....and in some degree these songs are rocking....but does that make it good? Just because one likes to call them "a heavy punk influence" mean they should get five stars off the bat? No--they haven't switched it up.....they havent ventured away from their past.....they did not grow...and it has all been heard before; but then again, if it works, and people buy it; might as well keep doing it.... now i remember the album is pretty bad I've never really listened to a lot of stuff these F2F has done, but ever since they butchered Chesterfield King, I've been kind of turned off towards them. I think I may just go download a few more of their songs and give them a final chance, you know, not to be an ass about it? As for BR, I wasn't much of a fan either, but The Process... was an outstanding album. Oh well. Music's music, and opinions are opinions. christ scott, you sure put a bunch of panties in a twist with that review. I didnt even think face to face was that popular and now everyone and thier mother is bitching about how good they are. For the record i could never get in FTF, I've listened to some of thier songs both old and new and I never thought they were that great. The only good song they did on the DKM split was "Wasted Life" and that was a Stiff Little Finger's song. I'd call your mother a cunt Scott but she is a face to face fan, she told me so last night. She said "UmmmphIUmmmphlikeUmmmphfaceUmmmphtoUmmmphface" and I understood every word with my dick in her mouth... Alright, now usually I can understand the innundating amounts of punkwrock records that come out and how hard it is to be up on everything. But you guys have somebody writing for your staff that has never heard the "Don't turn away" or self-titled face to face albums. While "How to ruin" doesn't create anything new, the simple truth is that it rocks. It rocks hard. So my suggestion is that somebody string this bastard up by his little toes from a yardarm and beat him in the face with a ball ping hammer untill he can appreciate so-cal rock for what it is. Fanfuckingtastic. I taint the website? well mr. kirby pucket, Peace and unity!!! As usual I was scrolling through the comments, because I only read things by certain people. Simply because a lot of people write like 2nd graders or have no idea what they are talking about. To the fucktard who called me a fucktard. I just looked at a map of the US. Then I turned my eyes over to California. Then I looked at the lower portion of the state, the Southern part if you will. And I assumed this is what is commonly referred to as Southern California. This album may not be the second coming of Christ but it is certainly not the pile of steaming monkey shit that some are making it out to be. Some bands cannot change their sound...like Face to Face. They play (I hate to say it) southern California punk rock. They are good at it, and their feeble attempts to change their sound in previous albums sounded poorly. The production quality of this album is superb...I guess I just like my music loud and clear, instead of the muffled sound that plagues most punk groups.. Give this album a listen. well, i just got this fucking cd and the only thing that i want to say right now after listeing to four songs is that scott must have been listening to creed. I think someone sent you a creed cd in a face to face case, cause this is the furthest fucking thing from what you call "arena rock" that i have ever fucking heard. Arena rock, what the fuck man? get off the drugs. I am liking so far to say the least. For the grammar police on this site, the "I" in the last sentence is a typo. Scott, I'm not going to bash you for your taste in music, but the whole Bad Religion/F2F comparison was a bunch of rambling. You seem to listen to a lot of emo, which makes me understand why you can't appreciate F2F. But next time, I listen to a little more of a band of this stature before making conclusions. Uninspired warped tour music? What the fuck has F2F todo with it, hey dude i bet you didnt even listen once to that album, so be fair and dont tell bullshit. And if you have listened to it, than its even worse with your comment, cause it makes me think you have no clue of music at all. christ this band sucks. all the people angry with the reviewer are proof that uninspired warped tour punk will never die. i miss dk. better than reactionary, but overall a weak album. even if u didn't like the cd, i think that would be accepted by the readers. the problem is that when we read a review, we want to know if the album is any good, if so, why? and if the album isn't good, why? scott's review reminds me of when i was in school, and some retard would do a book report and add in his favorite summer memory - which had exactly zero to do with the contents of the book - for 90% of it. the kid is illiterate, so writing about his vacation is the closest he could come to making sense. yet in the end, he was still a retard. like scott. You can't hate the guy for doing a simple review of an album... after all, he did get everyone talking about it. My only qualm was that I thought a negative review like this might turn a lot of people away from getting, what I think is, a really great album. It reminds of another reviewer (I don't remember if it was on this site) who was talking a lot of shit about the new Strung Out and 98 Mute albums, and then went on to say his favorite new album is Pedro the Lion. If he really likes Pedro the Lion, maybe he shouldn't be doing any Strung Out or 98 Mute reviews... because those reviews would be completely irrelevant to someone who is already into that kind of music. to the fucktard two posts below, so-cal is not a location on a map. Where is it then, if you are so sure its a place. this site used to be so good now all i read is gay reviews from fags. How did I steal MP3s? I linked to the ones provided by Vagrant [except for the last one, I found that off F2F's webpage]. I do that so people can download them after they read the review to either help support or negate my opinion stated in the review. I think you're just drunk. First of all you son-of-a-bitch, you have no idea. Who are you, Stuart Green's backstreet boy? Fuck what people say, face to face are 50Xs better than Bad Religion ever was and mixmatching your review between bands is pathetic. The return to a indie label? Really the only album that was on a major was the self titled one and that didn't do too bad. Like someone said on the board "when they did Ignorance is Bliss, they had no record label". When IiB came out on Beyond (which I wouldn't consider a major), it sold alot of copies even though it got bashed by reviewers. People said they were trying to cash in on 'that' sound.. HAHAHA! They got away from the 'in' sound when they made that record. You punk reviewers want a bands entire catalog to sound the same. Y'all are idiots.. You expect the 30-somethig year old members of face to face to continue making songs where they are supposed to run around stage and act like a bunch of 16 year olds? Hordes of F2F fans everywhere heralded the move as a rebirth of the band? Give me a break.. On the bands message board, not too many people bashed any of their albums from the last 4 years.. You just think that because that is what you want to think. Tell me this, what is NOT boring SoCal punk to you? SoCal is a location you fucking dweeb. Not a sound. well i am in the middle of listening to the album right now. well after finally finding a copy of this album today, it is on hold for me since i cannot get to it now, i am to say the least anxious to pop this into my cd player tomorrow. after everything that has went down on this comment board today, i cannot wait to hear to this cd. i have high expectations for it, but i think they will be met by face to face as they always have done. I still and always will think this reviewed suck, but that review and everything else on this review page comment wise made me anxious to go get this cd. i'll see what i think tomorrow. first off, i don't understand how a reviewer from punknews hasn't really heard face to face, let alone bad religion. These are 2 of the first bands that i discovered in the punk rock world. Can someone please do another review of this album? I appreciate it. face to face is one of the better punk bands out there. All of the insolent fools that claim to like punk because they wear a NOFX Tshirt, or play in a lame ass garage band, or write reviews for bands they have no background on are to be shot by me. This INANE review of this record is laughable. How could anyone think this record is a bore? Were you hit in the head as a child or something? This "Scott" that reviewed this needs to be shot; by me, in the ass. You're an idiot. Get some taste. For those of you that didnt like Ignorance is Bliss, you truly are ignorant in the most serious sense. OPEN YOUR FUCKING EARS YOU PIECES OF SHIT.. GOD DAMN IT I'm sick of people that say "they should play like this, because I like Bad Religion.. if they dont play like this, they suck" YOU suck. BR is a decent band, i dont have anything against them. They had some great records. Unfortunately, they have NOTHING TO DO WITH FACE TO FACE. Get your head out of your ass and listen to some good music, dumbass. Amazing band. It's funny how they have ignorant people try and judge good music. Best band in punk music right now. They make real music. they definately don't survive based on their name. And, any real music fan can appreciate their music. People want punk to be their version of punk. Face to face defies the stereotypes and people are afraid of that. This, like evry other f2f CD is awesome. face to face = great record Hey guess what? This website has too much punk for me so im not going to come here anymore (ie: the face to face CD was too much SO CAL Punk, so it sucked according to Scott, who fails to listen to the disc close;y) Can we stop writing essays now? Please? Oh Sorry, excuse me, didnt know we have no right to demand a convincing review, sorry, how was this section called again.... Cause i havent heard it yet, and this review doesnt convince me! Can people PLEASE stop bashing this review. It's getting pretty fucking old. Sure the review wasn't to good, but anyone who write reviews write a couple of bad ones. Anyway, why don't your write your own review of the album instead of wining. you all really should stop shitting on Scott. The fact that he wrote a review about this CD, not having any knowledge of their back catalogue is a good thing. it won't only be people that are familiar with their old stuff who buy this CD. some of the peole won't know jack about their past stuff, so reading a review from someone in the same position is helpful. I thought this was a good review, and the comparison of an influencing band and the influenced band is helpful. if you really don't know which band he's reviewing, there's something wrong, because it's quite obvious. if you like the record, then good for you, but just because you don't agree with him, and don't like one review he's written, doesn't mean he's the worst reviewer ever to walk this earth. it's also really lame to assume he loves Blink 182 and New Found Glory. why don't you look at the other reviews he's written instead. I appreciate most of the reviews on here, but the minute I read that this person was never really into F2F, I knew that this review was gonna be absolute shite. the problem is this: Is everybody blind or didnt you notice that only the last half part of the review has to do with the album. (50%) From this part the only thing that comes close to an ALBUM review is : I heard about half of the album on mp3's and it's all average run of the mill type stuff. unfortunately the album only came out yesterday and like i said the i went to two indies and best buy as well and no one had gotten their shipments yet, along with the new slick shoes as well. So, it is kinda hard to write a review when you haven't heard it. Also, i do believe to write an acurrate review, it might take longer than a day for you to get a real impression of the cd and what it is about, has to offer, it's intracacies. If you didn't do that, you would write a half assed review, that would have no substance that would come out sounding just like the one that scott wrote for us. That is not to say that he did not take his time with his review, he might have, but i know if i listened to a cd yesterday that i got, then wrote a review that i posted today, it would be the worst thing i would ever write, because you cannot truly get to know all that a set of music has to offer in less than 24 hours. i could write a review that would say this sounded like this, but then you would all just bag on me for telling you what each song sounded like. And to the guy that said the one guy that tried to write a small review only gave us F2F's history, think again, he gave us a small taste of what a sophisticated/educated review (good or bad final decision on cd wise) should sound like. Read the stuff about trevors vocals again, scott's base riffs, and the acoustic song description. All of those qualities, TELL US THINGS ABOUT THE MUSIC. THAT MAKES ME WANT TO HEAR THE CD. I could have cared less if scott had wrote stuff like that which pointed out that the cd was horrible. obviously you missed all that stuff though. That is what a review should sound like, whether bagging a band, or congratulating a band. Rethink your idea of what a review is. or come up with something better to say. Some people need to read a little more and broaden their horizons. This is not a journalistic thing here, but reviews should really be something more, if you don't think so, then i don't know what to say. That guy 3 posts down that wrote the long ass comment attempting to be a review is so cool... he knows everything about F2F's history and can name off old albums like a pro but no where in his little "review" of Face to Face did he ever tell us what they sound like. He gave us a little insight into the history of the band and what a few of their different songs are kind of like but never did he say anything about the overall feel of the music. I wish people that complain would prove to me that they can do a better job! For all you people out there who are condemning the reviewer for his own personal opinion, Hitler and Mussolini are looking for a third for their golf game, if any of you are interested. now whoever wrote that nice little review below me should've had a whole review posted. that is a damn good job. Ummm.. has anyone else read any of the other reviews posted lately? There are a whole bunch a whole lot worse than this one. Give him a break, even if his opinion does suck. I mean, come on, he likes the Barenaked Ladies. I would never bag on anyone for their opinion. I would never want you to sugarcoat your review either. However, after reading your review, I've come to different opinions than you. It probably has more to do with me knowing the history of the band, listening to their releases multiple times, and seeing them once or twice on tour. it's funny howe the only comments I read are- you are very welcome oldpunker Thank you chris-oldpunker- He may have "looked over, studied and examined again" but he sure as hell didn't convey any of what he found out to us in a way that was a "to write a critical report" because if to say something has "overproduction" and sound like "arena rock" is a critical review, i must be an idiot. Those offer no insights into the sound of the album, nor do they critically examine or convey to us what the problem areas are in the overproduction and arena rock area's. to the guy 2 responses below me, your use of the dictionary is wonderful, but you can't stick up for what was a very uncreative and lackluster review. i am not mad he gave it a bad one, as i said earlier i have not yet heard it, but he offered no true insight or reasoning, or descriptions as to why this cd was bad, overproduced and sounded like arena rock. also, i do think it is necessary to be familiar with a bands back catalogue, especially a band like face to face who has quite a few releases, because i am sure many would agree with me, that when a band has a good number of releases out it is nice and a rather good idea to evalute and compare and EXAMINE a new release while also examining the old. To see how they (as i had said earlier) PROGRESSED or how they have REGRESSED or digressed from what else they have done in the past. If you don't see this reasoning, you might want to re-evaluate some things. Bottom line, this review SUCKED. Not cause he gave them a bad score, but because it offered us the readers ABSOLUTELY NO INSIGHT INTO THIS ALBUM WHATSOEVER. it is as plain as day. To say this record sounds like arena rock and is way too overproduced, give no descriptive example from the album as to why and then move on is idiotic. If you didn't know what a tree looked like and i told you it was green, i am guessing you would think that would suffice. i would hope not. Essentially in this review he told us this record was bad, but you know what he never, ever, NOT ONE TIME, told us in anyway shape of form, WHY. That is all i want, a review that adequately, creatively, constructively and descriptively examines a cd, and then does all those things again, only putting what they found into words that i can read. Get good reviewers, ones with ability and knowledge, or read reviews before they are posted and make sure they tell us something, and are not just someone rambling about how this is bad religion, only i am reviewing face to face, and i am not familiar . . . but i think. That is all i want. i am getting this damn cd today, regardless of whether it is the worst thing i ever heard, cuz i need to see if i would ever write this exact same review from the impression i get from this cd. dude.....scott....you have no room to talk. your band was honestly the worst band i've ever seen Thanks for the honest review, Scott. What a lot of you are forgetting is that he judged the album ON ITS OWN TERMS. You don't need to know the entire recording history of a band to have an opinion on one of their albums. Scott knows punk and knows what is good and therefore can tell us that this album is a piece of shit. And i gave my opinion of him, so lay off-oldpunker Alright, I have not heard this album and am not extremely familiar with F2F's past releases but I know this... Just because Scott was not familiar with this band does not make it wrong for him to give the album a bad review. You all keep talking about all the different sounds that F2F has put out over the years but then you all go and condem Scott for not being able to make comparisons to their older work. Why would you want to compare it if it changes to greatly over the years. Also, a review is "to look over study and examine again", "to write or give a critical report." This to me seems to be what he did. He told us what he thought the overall album was like and he gave us specific examples of what he liked and why and what he did not like and why. Wouldnt someone be more likely to give a truthful review of something if they have never heard anything of the previous albums so that he could give an opinion on the album that was unbiased? Lay off...-pat41 A pasty sweaty nutsack - bigjerk What the hell is a "buttersack"?!?!? Why did I review the album? Scott, I think you had some creativity in the manner in which you reviewed this album. I also have drawn the paralel in my mind over the last few months between bad religion and face to face both moving back to indies. I can't really judge the merits of your review yet because I have only heard sound clips from the album and a few mp3's, not the whole thing in its entirety. I will say that I was dissapointed with what I had heard so far, but I want to really listen and evaluate this record before I form an opinion, because it has often taken me a few listens to fully judge this bands releases in the past. If you can't see how they are an influence to the scene in so many ways, go pick up a copy of Don't Turn Away. Then you shopuld get it. as to the guy who said F2F influenced Social D, I definitely think it is the other way around, considering Sociol D has been a band for about a decade longer. This cd is the return of F2F regardless of what you say, buttersack. They turned back the clocks to "Don't turn Away" era and I think it rocks. - bigjerk Amen to the posts below me, and to adam there is nobody here saying they are punk as fuck,all we are saying is that scott has no clue about f2f so why review them if you dont know them(other than a few songs,and one last thing,this cd is "arena rock"? Yeah you know what your talking about. -oldpunker Man this review is a bad joke. Someone who says he was never into those bands thinks he is able to judge the new records? If you arent into this band then you wont like their ne album anyway! Whats the point of a review from you then! I want a review of somebody who heard the album and can compare them. And you think you can judge BR's major label albums also? Perhaps you should first learn that quality isnt represented by sellnumbers, and especially not for BR, since they always said they dont measure success by record sellings. And i also like Ignorance is Bliss so there you go all major label haters. By what i know from FacetoFace and as far as i can judge the album by listening to the three released mp3 and the listening to the album online (they had clips from every song for a short period) i want to give it a 10, cause F2F never dissapointed me and yes, i am into F2F, and i am into BR, cause i gave more than one album a chance. Oh yes, all of that was not to say that i feel he should have given the cd a better review. It was all to say that i feel he was inadequate to review the cd and that a review of that caliber by a staff member should not have been posted. If they are checked before they go up, whether a good or bad review of an album, as long as it makes clear points, shows inteligence, and overall does a good job of telling readers the ups and downs/goods and bads of the cd it should be posted. THat review told us nothing. just wanted to state that so i don't get bashed for what i said. We are screaming and whining because scott is a horrible reviewer. He knows none of the back catalogue of face to face, cannot make comparisions and cannot see their progression ( or regression for that matter.) i have not heard but one song off the new album as my record store did not have it in yesterday, but i do feel his review is a bit unfair and inadequate. I feel it might not be his fault because he is not all to familiar with the band, but his review of the album was unispiring and lacking. If he is a part of the punknews.org team he should be well read on the bands he is reviewing and at least be familiar with a small amount of their back catalogue. With that said i feel we can whine and complain as much as we want, because i am sure that their are other non punknews.org site associated employees that would |
