Metacritic

[Jondalar]

97% of Stevie's reviews for this album have been postitive. Yet, whoever is running metacritic does not like Stevie Nicks. There are only 7 reviews on their site and 3 of them, including the dumb ones from Slant and Onion, are the bad ones. Very peculiar. Her metascore has now dropped to 69 and if they continue this bullcrap will go below 60% shortly. Whoever is doing her wikipedia has been using the metascore to indicate critical response to the album. Not right. There has got to be a reason for this. I know that Metacritic refused to put US 4 star review in their scale. They say they don't use them. It looks like they are just going to continue to post these low reviews from crappy publications until she goes below 60. This is bull.

http://www.metacritic.com/music/in-y...critic-reviews

[tabruns]

I asked them if they would be including the Billboard review and haven't gotten a response.

[BombaySapphire3]

I don't think the score will drop much more..like I pointed out in the reviews thread(will this thread will likely end up)There is a very wide schism between the reviews that the mainstream press are giving this album and the reviews from sites/publications that are hipster/indie based and metacritic is skewed toward these.The good news is that most people who might buy her albums will probably see only the mainstream reviews.From what i have read of them the hipster/indie type critics are mainly lambasting her just for being Stevie Nicks and staying true to her muse .

[Jondalar]

They have also not included the Boston Globe review which is positive and they have it on others pages. It just amazes me that they have the 3 worse reviews on their site. I don't trust them at all. Other performers such as the Fleet Foxes and Beastie have over 30 reviews counted, STEVIE HAS 7. And three are the worse ones.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

I don't think the score will drop much more..like I pointed out in the reviews thread(will this thread will likely end up)There is a very wide schism between the reviews that the mainstream press are giving this album and the reviews from sites/publications that are hipster/indie based and metacritic is skewed toward these.The good news is that most people who might buy her albums will probably see only the mainstream reviews.From what i have read of them the hipster/indie type critics are mainly lambasting her just for being Stevie Nicks and staying true to her muse .

which is soo strange really because she is the queen of the hippies

[tabruns]

I think it's a reaction against the mainstream reviewers frankly. With Rolling Stone, US, AllMusic Guide and Entertainment Weekly all raving about the album, I think the hipster rags started feeling that it would be "uncool" to also rave about the album. A.V. definitely often gives off this vibe of being very condescending to what's "popular".

The negative reviews from Slant and A.V. don't even make logical sense in that they're quite vague in their criticisms and in fact basically recycle the same criticisms that have been leveled at Nicks before: her lyrics are "school girlish" or the songs meander or whatever. It's SO strange to see these criticisms leveled at THIS album, because this album so obviously doesn't do any of what they're complaining about. One of the negative reviews said most of the songs on the album were "incomplete"! Are they kidding? How in the world are "Secret Love", "For What It's Worth", "In Your Dreams", "New Orleans", "Everybody Loves You" or "Ghosts Are Gone" incomplete in any way?

I also found it very telling that in both cases the reviewer made great pains to claim they are a Nicks fan but this album just isn't good. It's like the old saying goes: "Thou protests too much". I think they went to such great pains because they knew they were going to be called on their bull**** reviews.

[Jondalar]

Well, whoever is doing Stevie's Wickepedia should not site metacritic if they are soo biased.

[IKV Nexis]

The Onion? The Onion is the On Line News version of the Daily Show and The Colber Report. Nothing on that sight should be taken any ware near seriously.

[Macfanforever]

Probably most of these critics probaby were in diapers when Stevie's Belladonna record was release.They really give a hoot about an old lady {sorry Stevie} trying to make a comeback.As an old geezer like me .If I was a critic writing a review on current music .I probably say most of todays music is ***** , dont buy it.

Thanks for posting this thread. (This is my first response here actually) I've been frustrated as well with Metacritic and was even more so when I saw here score drop to 68%. You're right, it makes no sense at all that all these other albums have 30 reviews taken into consideration for calculating their score, but Stevie gets 7. If they took all her reviews for IYD, I bet she could hit 80% easily.

[Jondalar]

I really think late reviewers are going to look on metascore and give her a lower rating because of it. The critic game is all about not looking bad. There are very critics whose opinions are honest. I'm pissed.

[Josh2003]

Why are you always so concerned with what *others* think? Every thread you start is about how other people are reviewing her album, or how many people are buying it.

If you like it, just enjoy it! It's clear that all of her real fans are loving it, so don't stress yourself out over how other people are viewing it!

[PenguinHead]

Originally Posted by Jondalar

which is soo strange really because she is the queen of the hippies

Old hippies. A big difference.

I'm in total disbelief reading the horrible and negative comments about the album. There are many people who have expressed much hate, disdain and disappointment.

What's so perplexing is that they are saying they were fans, professing their love of her earlier work!!! Really? How can they consider themselves fans, yet find nothing redeemable on her new album? It's all bull ****. They obviously have no clue about Stevie, and have no appreciation or understanding about her character, her history, her mannerisms, her eccentricities etc... That has never changed! Stevie has alway been consistent in her inconsistencies.

It there is any saving grace, it's that significant work or art of any impact usually sparks very polarizing, subjective opinions. It's a love or hate proposition. In that regard, I love In Your Dreams even more.

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by Josh2003

Why are you always so concerned with what *others* think? Every thread you start is about how other people are reviewing her album, or how many people are buying it.

If you like it, just enjoy it! It's clear that all of her real fans are loving it, so don't stress yourself out over how other people are viewing it!

Agreed. And I haven't even heard of metacritic before... I'm guessing most people I know haven't either.

[Jondalar]

Originally Posted by Josh2003

Why are you always so concerned with what *others* think? Every thread you start is about how other people are reviewing her album, or how many people are buying it.

If you like it, just enjoy it! It's clear that all of her real fans are loving it, so don't stress yourself out over how other people are viewing it!

It is the best reviewed album of her solo career. I'm sure Stevie cares. She worked hard on this thing, and can barely promote it. She doesn't need this ****. Obviously, other people care about Metacritic because they continue to site it in her stupid Wikepedia and people do use it for background information. I mean come on. Get out of your bubble. It matters. I'm tired of seeing her being lambasted for not being with Fleetwood Mac, or being a hippie. At least she tries to write her own stuff and be an artist. You would think at the age 63 the crap would stop. Not quite.