because they aren't a bad band at all but I agree with the Pitchfork review more than the DiS one

that I've agreed with in a while. As you said, it's certainly the most accurate review of the record that I've seen.

i've come to trust pitchfork a lot more than recent DiS reviews (where 8/10 is the new average rating).

stop the hypemaking!

But not that interested. Anyway, Foals LOL

The best review I've read.

The band show loads of potential and are shit-hot players (specially the drummer)

But the vocals have little emotional resonance and he tends to just shout the same lyrics a lot.

In the sense that it doesn't bow down to the hype.

However, i feel all this foals bashing lately is just a testament to the strangely jealous opinionated nation we have become.

I'd rather listen to, and see foals get big than see shit like the feeling everywhere. Good on them thats what i say. I think it's a waste of negative energy to throw it at a band that are actually good/hard working whether you like them or not.

I personally like the album a lot. Do i think it's going to stand the test of time? I don't know. But in the meantime im happy to dance my socks off to it.

This is why the review makes sense in my eyes. Doesn't over praise them, but mererly points out that maybe the over hype should take a step back and look at the bigger picture...

After a few listens I would have give the album a DiS style 6/10. Therefore I agree.

it is a supergood review. sums up just how i feel about it.

why?

but i get the impression that Pitchfork have many a gripe with the British hype machine that is pretty much shown in this review. They'd be right to knock it as the Brtish music media is rather lame, but i think in this particular instance it has perhaps clouded their judgement. I reckon if this album had come of the the blue then they may have CYHSY'd it. Well maybe not that far but at least looked for more positives in the album, of which there are quite a few. When i read the review i thought it got a lot right but kept bringing up the British thing, from which which the band have at least made an effort to detach themselves from.

pitchfork has finally decided for us what to think about this band,
thank you daddy pitchfork

http://www.audioscribbler.co.uk/reviews/foalsantidotes.htm

Score's a bit too low though- it is a fun album even if it is lacking in replay value.

the work of a bunch of twats.
I'm not going to waste time reading the review but it sounds like it didn't get sucked in by the british hype.

and I find this review quite kind.

But why do you have to assume good reviews on DiS/NME are due to hype and not of someone actually really loving the band ?

Than 80 or so percent of popular British guitar bands.

the Pitchfork review agrees

i really like it when reviews back up my personal opinions so i can use them to make sweeping statements as well!

i mean they're getting such good press coverage, and are on the telly lots and in the big papers and stuff and they have hair cuts and lots of people really seem to love them so, er like, they just can't be good can they? I mean their just so mainstreem, an dnowhere near obscure enough for me....

etc, etc...

ive always struggled to understand the appeal of Foals - and why they're constantly referred to as a Math band. I thought the P4k review was excellent in articulating some similar doubts (sorry Bilbo).

It's a pretty solid debut, probably a 6 or 7.

Though I'm just saying what about 20 other people have said here.

They're no Dillinger.