...but were leaning closer to generalising than you were to non-generalising. In general, it's good practice to round these cases up to 'generalising' and so in general, I'd say you generalise more than you're generally led to believe.

I apologise...............

what i mean to say is: people who are pretentious for the sake of being pretentious, or say something so they can be the one who said it, generally suck. the guy for example who is the first to say "the book was better" when the book obviously was better so he could be the one to say it was better. he sucks

a bands first album is generally the best songs they've ever written in their lives up to the point it was recorded. the second album is the best songs they could write whilst being on a tour for a year.

and if the first album is a success, oasis being the best example, the band get all the attention/fame/money/drugs they dreamed of and it inevitably shows in their songs.

not that i think about this all the time..

Though I did like the film, twas very good. Just preferred the bit in the book when he emerged from the vault as if he'd been in there for years.

And this only happens to those who 'make it' and then stop leading real lives.

interpol, the rakes + GNR were good, now shit
beatles, ATDI + pumpkins were shit, but now good. altho i dont agree that the pumplins and atdi were ever 'shit'

There are some strong cases though: Interpol, Strokes, Elastica, Gang of Four. Along with several others where you can easily argue the case: REM, Kate Bush, Pavement. So this is a silly argument.

I feel like R.E.M have been on an almost unbroken downward trajectory since Murmur.

Still quite like them though.