Manic Street Preachers
Send Away The Tigers

Good lord, what a boring, po-faced piss poor review. I imagine it took less time to write than it does to read.

First of all, twatboy, there is no song called "This One's For The Freaks". It's "Underdogs" - get it right.
Secondly, you are obviously a spotty student who loves The View and Franz Ferdinand and really wants to work for the NME but can't get a job there due to a complete lack of talent. Therefore you are trying to invent yourself as some kind of indie Simon Cowell who wouldn't know a good album if it hit him in the tiny testicles. SATT is great - suck ma boab.

my nads are actually normal-sized. or so my mum tells me.

Having written for the NME is not much to brag about.

Fair dues you clearly don't like the band or the album, but i belive the score given is way off the mark. I belive the lyrics have improved since the last, rather dismal releases, and they don't stoop to take potshots at oh so typical targets or jump on any bandwagons.
Also you only mention the weaker tracks, songs like the second great depression and rendition are unequivically great songs. And I belive there is a great amount of passion on display, again far more so than the utterly lackluster lifeblood, or the flawed know your enemy.
Your comparisons also seem entirely off the mark, aside from the indian summer/design for life example. and you seem to have clearly missed the concept of many of the songs, and the album as a whole. The album, even to non-fans, is nowhere near as bad as a four, and it does seem drownedinsound are at the moment going out of there way to be overly harsh to the manic street preachers. And the lyrics refering to lennon to motown junk were never about 'lennon baiting', he was just a good example of a ridicously revered figure at the time.

i don't think so. people do enjoy getting their knickers in a twist at the Manics continued existence don't they? so many approach them in a joyless, humourless way and then tell us that they hear joyless humourless music. so like, you really think they don't know how daft Autumn Song is? you really think they don't know the irony of covering Lennon? you really think Winterlovers- that for the love of God climaxes with 'The End' style bass, guitar and drum spotlights- is straightfaced? that they're going through the motions?

no. it's a unashamed pop record that they clearly had a lot of fun making, and you've been a right miserable git about it.

...this album is toss. I'm an "old manics" fan, but I love EMG, and I really liked Lifeblood and JDB's solo album, so I had really high hopes for Tigers. But, it really is shit, even taken as a stand-alone piece of work.

"I laughed when Lennon got shot..." - oh god, the IRONY.

Are you sure?! Or had you decided what score you were going to give the album before you'd written the review? (Like anyone EVER does that on DIS!). And who exactly had billed it as a return to form? The NME?!

Anyway, I think the album's good! It's probably the warmest thing they've ever done and it's a fun listen. Plus, they've finally learnt how to edit a record to a reasonable length. A bit more variation would've been nice mind.

Oh, and Know Your Enemy's under-rated! If only it had been 11 tracks and not 16. And hadn't had those 2 stupid lead singles. And, erm, they'd never let Nicky near a microphone. Ho-hum.

the manics have always contradicted themselves. i doubt you're an "old manics fan" if you think its ironic.

the reviewer has missed the point by saying "with an apparently straight-face"... this is all tongue in cheek, all humour. they know its overblown, over-the-top, ridiculous and rips off themselves and other bands, they don't care its whats natural to them. it's a fun, light-hearted record. I really enjoyed it I would give it a 7 or an 8...

It's made up of many different writers with many different opinions. 9/10 for one writer may not be the same for another.

Not discovered Facebook yet?

but perhaps the writer should do his homework a little better in describing it as that, considering where his article is going to be published.

'fucking loves it when uptight fanboys/girls register on this/any site just to whine about a bad review some band has received. it's my all-time favourite internet thing.'

Might not have been on facebook yet. Or BBC News. or the MSN homepage. or google. I could go on!

The only thing old and tired about the manics is the laughable reviews they get from journos who are too fixated with motives and intentions.

We've seen it all before. Lazy hacks with a grudge not being able to see past their own bias, and the hardcore being OTT defending the band.

I'm happy to just enjoy another solid effort from the boys. Granted this record won't change my life, and it probably won't return to my CD player past 2007.

Fuck bowler hats, ties, haircuts and skinny jeans. JD Bradfield will blow your socks off live, without a hint of pretension. Roll on Astoria May 30th.

is that the manics have finally become the inevitable parody of themselves ... but on their own terms ... and certain myopic reviewers won't get the 'joke'. It's not a great record (not even a particularly good one) but it certainly exposes lazy music jounalism. That alone makes it worth more than four.

ps the manics are old and fat and only made one good album

this is a lazy MSP review by the book. can we get someone else to review this record please? i was looking forward to some critical assessment rather than playground jibes.

the album is a 6. pretty much musically accomplished, lyrically redundant.

i've said before, having made 'the holy bible' and 'everything must go', we can forgive them for anything. even 'underdogs', no matter how terrible it is.

Just a minor point, but errr, isn't watching over a review to see if you can make a jibe at one person over and over again just as bad as joining a website to defend a band?

It would be alright if you were proper funny like, but errr...

You are an idiot. It's writing like this that makes me winder why I'm bothering with this site anymore.

ps This album is great.

it's really poorly written, the guy seems to have set out his stall from the start and decided what he's going to think of the record before hearing it and I am just getting more and more disappointed with the writing of late. This and the Hold Steady single review have really made me despair.

to criticise the reviewer with such vitriol is nothing more than a massive cop-out, and simply shies away from the fact that the boy Denney has sadly - and I say this as a long-time Manics fan - hit the nail on the head, particularly in his last paragraph.

And as for those whingeing about harking back to what they've done beforehand. It's the fact they've such an astounding back catalogue that has allowed them to continue making records today, and when you've made one of the most influential and iconic albums of the last thirty years as they have ('The Holy Bible'), comparisons are always going to be inevitable.

That is all.

In terms of the Manics, this album is pretty much mediocre. It's nowhere near as good as the holy bible, but then again i've heard worse from them.
However, this mediocre is a completely different to being mediocre like, for example, the View. I think the album is worth about a 6, a 4 to me suggests that it's flaws make it not worth a listen, which is something I'd disagree with, as though the album has a few dismal efforts, there are also some cracking tunes. Not brilliant, but I doubt they're capable of brilliance anymore.

Apparently the Manics know how shit they are, but they're having fun so thats ok.

The band were genuinely exciting in the early 90s if you were a sixth-former, but for the last 10 years they've churned out interminable, lifeless pub rock. I'm surprised how much of this shite their fans can take, are they into S&M or something? I can listen to old music by formerly great bands without having to rabidly defend their current output...

that a lot of people seem to hate this review. i also notice that no-one has posted a review of their own.

so most of you like it enough to lay into the writer for having a different (although harsh) opinion to yours, but not enough to actually put on your thinking caps and give anyone an alternative read?

so it's a bit "the system is wrong.. but we won't do anything to change it!", and doesn't that just about sum up the Manics?

have over-taken Oasis fans as my favourite fan-boys, they are only lagging behind Doherty fan-boys in their vociferous defence of their flagging idols.

Alex Denney is a good writer from what I've seen on here, and whilst I dont always agree with his reviews, I dont expect to either, and neither should any of you uber-tool Manics fans.

x

I already know of two of your ilk who have been turned away from their Wire-worshipping courses by this album. I think the tacky, distateful cover might have been the final straw.

It's *okay*. This is the right time. You don't have to do this anymore. This is *right*. Come on, it's okay. Everything's going to be okay.

Let it all out. There we go.

x

we should just review the sleeve instead, it'll be much more fun than listening to the entire record.

it has real points and everything..

Music doesn't exist in a vacuum. I don't want a review written by a faceless entity with no preconceptions. What this review tells me is that for someone like me who despises what the Manics have turned into, this isn't going to be the record that changes my mind. If they'd managed to blow Denney's socks off despite him hating them; then yeah, that would be cause to really get me interested.

At least this reviewer sets out his stall and lets you know what he thinks of the band; it's clear that he's not a big fat liar and is slating it (despite secretly loving it) to be one of the kool kids.

I wouldn’t say that this review is particularly badly written, apart from the embarrassing use of the word “rockist”. The thing I don’t like about it is that I knew exactly what it would say before I read it. Just like Mike Diver’s review of “Underdogs”, it’s much more sneering than enlightening. There’s something unattractively gleeful about the way the writers on here lay into the Manics. I have no problem with them being subjective; it’s just the way they go about it that I dislike. I always get the sense that they start their reviews with a few choice, pre-prepared phrases (for example, “now you just sort of hope they’ll piss off quietly”) - THEN listen carefully to the album for bits they don’t like to support their pre-prepared verdict, before finally writing their review.

I think the tone of their reviews makes it perfectly acceptable for people to come on here and take pot shots at them. They seem pretty thin-skinned about it too, which is good. I had a good laugh reading Diver’s pompous comments defending Denney’s skills as a writer. “He regularly puts ME to shame,” he writes, as if they’re two titans battling it out in the “field” (“FIELD”! Hahaha – like they’re doctors or something) of writing… about indie bands.

how you could interpret Diver's comments as pompous.. and i'm pretty sure that him saying that he thinks Denney is a better writer than him doesn't particularly flag up either of them as thinking they're gods of journalism.

not that Mike needs anyone to defend him, i just think you might have misinterpreted.

The Manics have discovered 12/8 time!

using 'They clearly had fun making this record' as an excuse for it being shit? Even if it is tongue-in-cheek, it doesn't stop the music being terrible.

I don't understand the hatred of "This Is My Truth..." I happen to like it quite a bit.

I tried "Everything Must Go" and didn't care for it much. Perhaps someone can educate me as to the great faults of the former?

listened to the 'send away the tigers' lp and have to say it's not bad. it's pretty good compared to what they have done since EMG.

This Is My truth is just bland. It reminds me of when everyone read Q-Magazine and thought Travis were the kings of Indie. Those days have gone, and thanks god, with that lp. It's just a boring album bsides 'Little Empire' ithink it's called.

I resent the fact that people are being lambasted for their critical appraisals of a journalist's writing ability when this site spends so much time criticising the work of musicians. One rule for one, one for another.

My opinion is that this review panders to tired, boring cliches about the band that make for an easy review. A shame in my eyes because on the whole, I really like Alex's writing.

In conclusion, I think its fair to say that writers, like bands, have off days. Writers criticise many bands on here for their poor showings and get pretty personal so why shouldn't we as a community criticse a writer when we feel they've put up a poor showing?

Having a go at us for doing so Mike makes you something of a hypocrite in my book.

As an aside, I'm actually really enjoying the album and definitely think it is the best thing they've done since Everything Must Go. And I liked Lifeblood, as this site did when it gave it a 9/10. I reckon SATT is worthy of a solid 7/10 (maybe 7.6 if I'm allowed a Pitchfork-esque decimal), certainly not a 4.

this is exactly how i wanted to spend my sunday afternoon: reading a bunch of piss-poor-excuse-for well-supported arguments of subjective preferences. how about we all think the EXACT same way & nobody voices their opinion! that would be ace, right? this is hilarious.

And I like the Super Furry Animals.

I didn't agree with the review but that doesn't make it wrong - an opinion can't be wrong, surely? It was well written and amusing in places so it's simply bad form to attack the guy as a writer.

Why do some Manics fans still have to be so precious? Is the answer in the question? I just don't know.

that's exactly what i was thinking.

I'm afraid i do have to disagree. It is a mind numbingly boring album
and the review would have to be something very very special indeed to make this album seem at all interesting. Obviously i have much respect for the 'Manics' and wish them all the best but the dissapearance of Richey Edwards has really done the bands music no good at all.

I have tuppence and i will throw that into this thread. I have always found the Manics very hit and miss. This LP is like the miss of the season a shot over the bar from six yards. An Embarrassingly poor LP with not 1 half decent song. I take no pleasure in saying that this effort could finish them off. 2 out 0f 10, 1 of which I give for the artwork.

I am so relieved to read a review that conveys disappointment with this awful album.
I don't agree with everything in this review, because I like the MSP last few albums: I thought that they were full of songs not cliches.
But by God purchase of this new album left me with the sensation that I woz robbed.Coming to an oxfam near you...

I notice that Alex Denney reviewed this album for the Observer too (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/omm/reviews/story/0,,2059866,00.html). 3/5 was his rating there (=6/10) but only 4/10 here. Great consistency!

My personal view is that the album's pretty good, better than the last two. Some of the lyrics are cringeworthy but there's very few bands (if any) I can think of that, if you really wanted to, you couldn't hand-pick the odd line as 'evidence' of them being crap.

Clearly, Alex doesn't like the Manics and that's fair enough; everyone's entitled to their opinion.

So the Editor of the Observer is a big Manics fan who wouldn't stand for 2/5? If true, then surely Denney should do the honourable thing and resign as he is eing misrepresented - people might think he's of the opinon that the Manics should NOT "piss off quietly".