Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums

MADAME X album reviews


Recommended Posts

Has critics always been this divided regarding her albums? In swedish press the album has mostly not been so well received, but some are praising the album. I find the dichotomy kind of interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 907
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

7 minutes ago, micco said:

Has critics always been this divided regarding her albums? In swedish press the album has mostly not been so well received, but some are praising the album. I find the dichotomy kind of interesting.

There's something off from Germanic countries. It's as if Madame X pushed any weird button or something. The only places with bad reviews have been Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Weird! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, karbatal said:

There's something off from Germanic countries. It's as if Madame X pushed any weird button or something. The only places with bad reviews have been Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Weird! 

They were ready to write her off and are baffled now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, karbatal said:

There's something off from Germanic countries. It's as if Madame X pushed any weird button or something. The only places with bad reviews have been Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Weird! 

She’s had mixed, unfavorable reviews in the US/ UK too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dollhouse said:

They were ready to write her off and are baffled now

I don't know if it were related to Eurovision. Precisely, it is a very, very, very big event in those countries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, karbatal said:

Not as harsh and not as vile and not as many.

Most of the high profile publications (the ones that actually listened to the album) gave a good review. Let’s not overreact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lolo said:

Most of the high profile publications (the ones that actually listened to the album) gave a good review. Let’s not overreact. 

In Germany? The high profile newspapers gave vile reviews. The first positive review came from the Suddeutsche Zeitung. In fact, I'm sure that those German critics are feeling like idiots right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yay Boston Globe’s that someone posted earlier is very good!  She is going to do just fine on Meta.

critically acclaimed masterpiece!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a critically acclaimed album. Don't let a handful of lunatics color this. It is critically acclaimed and as fans we should be buying and streaming and not be so consumed by the usual detractors that have existed every inch of her 36 years as an artist. It is not gonna stop now. 

So moving on......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, karbatal said:

So, after we finally got rid of the chart drama now we have to enter a Metacritic drama. Frankly, many fans here are only happy suffering. 

 

Of course I want to see her do well with critical acclaim but why are people here so frantic over metacritic?! The only places I ever see metacritic cited and discussed are by dumb twinks arguing in stan war threads on twitter! I’ve never heard anybody IRL say, “oh so and so has a new album but I’m not sure if I should get it. let me go see what the metacritic rating is!” It’s not like rottentomatoes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, karbatal said:

In Germany? The high profile newspapers gave vile reviews. The first positive review came from the Suddeutsche Zeitung. In fact, I'm sure that those German critics are feeling like idiots right now. 

Süddeutsche, Focus, Welt, Zeit, Musikexpress gave a good Review. It’s as mixed as everywhere. Most of the negative stuff is from outlets who clearly haven’t heard shit and just copy paste as they please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Jeby said:

This is a critically acclaimed album. Don't let a handful of lunatics color this. It is critically acclaimed and as fans we should be buying and streaming and not be so consumed by the usual detractors that have existed every inch of her 36 years as an artist. It is not gonna stop now. 

So moving on......

👏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s important to remember that traditionally music critics have been straight male, rock-oriented, unprogressive, and anti-pop. I don’t see much of an evolution in this, other than in the way we’ve see nerds transform into hipsters because they adhere to the uniform society has prescribed and they went to the gym thanks to the tech industry’s economic clout and subsequent cultural takeover! The very notion of genre-shifting gives these people hives, and so Madonna is mostly not seen as an artist, but as a pillaging, cultural-appropriating, mediocrely talented entertainer who has simply skated over the zeitgeist as if by sheer force of narcissistic determination. These, I believe, are the assumptions of the writers of each 3/5, and some of the 4/5 reviews we have seen.

There has nearly always been a resistance to the notion that Madonna is creative and original. Instead, the only explanation for her success has to come from her deft manipulation and deceit. It’s the very essence of the patriarchy and its pernicious misogyny, and while the popular genres are no longer rock and soul, critics seem to approach Madonna as if she were still defined by another era when that was the case. 

My main point regarding critics and why I personally find them all essentially disappointing is that, as journalists, you’d expect them to seek a unique perspective on their subject. However, nearly every review is written as if based off of some version of a Cliff Notes bio born outside of context and the broader scope of investigation. This leads to a very monotonous, seemingly lazy approach to understanding the music, and most certainly to understanding Madonna herself; it’s as if the writer and reader require a revisionist history lesson in order to even begin to grasp who Madonna is and what she has done, the most irritating common thread in the collective narrative being that Madonna was once an iffy trendsetter by design, but has been assaulting the world with an uneven and mediocre output of trend-chasing albums since she was whipped into submission post-American Life. Ironically, you’d get the feeling that some of her fans agree with this narrative, thus reinforcing my theory that there are a good deal of masochists among us to have chosen to endure something they don’t actually appreciate for more than a decade! It’s as if Madonna has a requirement to be purely confessional, or limited to the naïveté of the anthemic disco-stomper. If her music and lyrics don’t address this need more obviously she has failed: she didn’t become Joni Mitchell, so how dare she pick up a guitar and write words that aren’t tantalizing, veiled confessionals; she didn’t grow grey, and become the wistful, nonchalant vagabond, writing enigmatic academic poetry like Patti Smith, and so how dare she manifest as a real sentient human being on a real human journey towards awakening and enlightenment. Oh! And we mustn’t forget that she is the only human being alive to wish to preserve her youthfulness. She should just stop investing in herself altogether beyond her past, acceptable accomplishments, and she should especially unplug from all technology because, well, she’s been old for over ten years and must stop challenging herself and the general public through this outrageous desire to invent, to innovate, to inspire and to be inspired. Otherwise, no matter how interesting it seems, it is “BIZARRE”.

Is it bizarre? Sure, it’s a narrative that deserves to be explored to a degree, but if you repeat something enough, it becomes the truth. “Madonna must fit into the quirky box now if she wants us to qualify this output”! It’s both disheartening and hysterical all at once! 

I have read very little of value that deserves to become the truth in these reviews. I can make up my own mind about what is good and bad, and Madame X is quintessentially Madonna at her best. Whether or not that is good enough for someone else doesn’t interest me much at all unless they are able to tell me why with knowledge, passion and intelligence, which is what a music critic is paid to do after all! I’m still waiting. 

 

Edited by Herfaceremains
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, karbatal said:

There's something off from Germanic countries. It's as if Madame X pushed any weird button or something. The only places with bad reviews have been Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Weird! 

Maybe these reviewers are strongly averse to one-eyed 'freedom fighter.' Or they feel that edm and pop-rock (especially in the vein of modern talking, michael learns to rock, and michael learns to rock) are superior to romance/latin music. -_~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Herfaceremains said:

I think it’s important to remember that traditionally music critics have been straight male, rock-oriented, unprogressive, and anti-pop. I don’t see much of an evolution in this, other than in the way we’ve see nerds transform into hipsters because they adhere to the uniform society has prescribed and they went to the gym thanks to the tech industry’s economic clout and subsequent cultural takeover! The very notion of genre-shifting gives these people hives, and so Madonna is mostly not seen as an artist, but as a pillaging, cultural-appropriating, mediocrely talented entertainer who has simply skated over the zeitgeist as if by sheer force of narcissistic determination. These, I believe, are the assumptions of the writers of each 3/5, and some of the 4/5 reviews we have seen.

There has nearly always been a resistance to the notion that Madonna is creative and original. Instead, the only explanation for her success has to come from her deft manipulation and deceit. It’s the very essence of the patriarchy and its pernicious misogyny, and while the popular genres are no longer rock and soul, critics seem to approach Madonna as if she were still defined by another era when that was the case. 

My main point regarding critics and why I personally find them all essentially disappointing is that, as journalists, you’d expect them to seek a unique perspective on their subject. However, nearly every review is written as if based off of some version of a Cliff Notes bio born outside of context and the broader scope of investigation. This leads to a very monotonous, seemingly lazy approach to understanding the music, and most certainly to understanding Madonna herself; it’s as if the writer and reader require a revisionist history lesson in order to even begin to grasp who Madonna is and what she has done, the most irritating common thread in the collective narrative being that Madonna was once an iffy trendsetter by design, but has been assaulting the world with an uneven and mediocre output of trend-chasing albums since she was whipped into submission post-American Life. Ironically, you’d get the feeling that some of her fans agree with this narrative, thus reinforcing my theory that there are a good deal of masochists among us to have chosen to endure something they don’t actually appreciate for more than a decade! It’s as if Madonna has a requirement to be purely confessional, or limited to the naïveté of the anthemic disco-stomper. If her music and lyrics don’t address this need more obviously she has failed: she didn’t become Joni Mitchell, so how dare she pick up a guitar and write words that aren’t tantalizing, veiled confessionals; she didn’t grow grey, and become the wistful, nonchalant vagabond, writing enigmatic academic poetry like Patti Smith, and so how dare she manifest as a real sentient human being on a real human journey towards awakening and enlightenment. Oh! And we mustn’t forget that she is the only human being alive to wish to preserve her youthfulness. She should just stop investing in herself altogether beyond her past, acceptable accomplishments, and she should especially unplug from all technology because, well, she’s been old for over ten years and must stop challenging herself and the general public through this outrageous desire to invent, to innovate, to inspire and to be inspired. Otherwise, no matter how interesting it seems, it is “BIZARRE”.

Is it bizarre? Sure, it’s a narrative that deserves to be explored to a degree, but if you repeat something enough, it becomes the truth. “Madonna must fit into the quirky box now if she wants us to qualify this output”! It’s both disheartening and hysterical all at once! 

I have read very little of value that deserves to become the truth in these reviews. I can make up my own mind about what is good and bad, and Madame X is quintessentially Madonna at her best. Whether or not that is good enough for someone else doesn’t interest me much at all unless they are able to tell me why with knowledge, passion and intelligence, which is what a music critic is paid to do after all! I’m still waiting. 

 

 

This should be pinned! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Herfaceremains said:

I think it’s important to remember that traditionally music critics have been straight male, rock-oriented, unprogressive, and anti-pop. I don’t see much of an evolution in this, other than in the way we’ve see nerds transform into hipsters because they adhere to the uniform society has prescribed and they went to the gym thanks to the tech industry’s economic clout and subsequent cultural takeover! The very notion of genre-shifting gives these people hives, and so Madonna is mostly not seen as an artist, but as a pillaging, cultural-appropriating, mediocrely talented entertainer who has simply skated over the zeitgeist as if by sheer force of narcissistic determination. These, I believe, are the assumptions of the writers of each 3/5, and some of the 4/5 reviews we have seen.

There has nearly always been a resistance to the notion that Madonna is creative and original. Instead, the only explanation for her success has to come from her deft manipulation and deceit. It’s the very essence of the patriarchy and its pernicious misogyny, and while the popular genres are no longer rock and soul, critics seem to approach Madonna as if she were still defined by another era when that was the case. 

My main point regarding critics and why I personally find them all essentially disappointing is that, as journalists, you’d expect them to seek a unique perspective on their subject. However, nearly every review is written as if based off of some version of a Cliff Notes bio born outside of context and the broader scope of investigation. This leads to a very monotonous, seemingly lazy approach to understanding the music, and most certainly to understanding Madonna herself; it’s as if the writer and reader require a revisionist history lesson in order to even begin to grasp who Madonna is and what she has done, the most irritating common thread in the collective narrative being that Madonna was once an iffy trendsetter by design, but has been assaulting the world with an uneven and mediocre output of trend-chasing albums since she was whipped into submission post-American Life. Ironically, you’d get the feeling that some of her fans agree with this narrative, thus reinforcing my theory that there are a good deal of masochists among us to have chosen to endure something they don’t actually appreciate for more than a decade! It’s as if Madonna has a requirement to be purely confessional, or limited to the naïveté of the anthemic disco-stomper. If her music and lyrics don’t address this need more obviously she has failed: she didn’t become Joni Mitchell, so how dare she pick up a guitar and write words that aren’t tantalizing, veiled confessionals; she didn’t grow grey, and become the wistful, nonchalant vagabond, writing enigmatic academic poetry like Patti Smith, and so how dare she manifest as a real sentient human being on a real human journey towards awakening and enlightenment. Oh! And we mustn’t forget that she is the only human being alive to wish to preserve her youthfulness. She should just stop investing in herself altogether beyond her past, acceptable accomplishments, and she should especially unplug from all technology because, well, she’s been old for over ten years and must stop challenging herself and the general public through this outrageous desire to invent, to innovate, to inspire and to be inspired. Otherwise, no matter how interesting it seems, it is “BIZARRE”.

Is it bizarre? Sure, it’s a narrative that deserves to be explored to a degree, but if you repeat something enough, it becomes the truth. “Madonna must fit into the quirky box now if she wants us to qualify this output”! It’s both disheartening and hysterical all at once! 

I have read very little of value that deserves to become the truth in these reviews. I can make up my own mind about what is good and bad, and Madame X is quintessentially Madonna at her best. Whether or not that is good enough for someone else doesn’t interest me much at all unless they are able to tell me why with knowledge, passion and intelligence, which is what a music critic is paid to do after all! I’m still waiting. 

 

How incredibly well stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Herfaceremains said:

I think it’s important to remember that traditionally music critics have been straight male, rock-oriented, unprogressive, and anti-pop. I don’t see much of an evolution in this, other than in the way we’ve see nerds transform into hipsters because they adhere to the uniform society has prescribed and they went to the gym thanks to the tech industry’s economic clout and subsequent cultural takeover! The very notion of genre-shifting gives these people hives, and so Madonna is mostly not seen as an artist, but as a pillaging, cultural-appropriating, mediocrely talented entertainer who has simply skated over the zeitgeist as if by sheer force of narcissistic determination. These, I believe, are the assumptions of the writers of each 3/5, and some of the 4/5 reviews we have seen.

There has nearly always been a resistance to the notion that Madonna is creative and original. Instead, the only explanation for her success has to come from her deft manipulation and deceit. It’s the very essence of the patriarchy and its pernicious misogyny, and while the popular genres are no longer rock and soul, critics seem to approach Madonna as if she were still defined by another era when that was the case. 

My main point regarding critics and why I personally find them all essentially disappointing is that, as journalists, you’d expect them to seek a unique perspective on their subject. However, nearly every review is written as if based off of some version of a Cliff Notes bio born outside of context and the broader scope of investigation. This leads to a very monotonous, seemingly lazy approach to understanding the music, and most certainly to understanding Madonna herself; it’s as if the writer and reader require a revisionist history lesson in order to even begin to grasp who Madonna is and what she has done, the most irritating common thread in the collective narrative being that Madonna was once an iffy trendsetter by design, but has been assaulting the world with an uneven and mediocre output of trend-chasing albums since she was whipped into submission post-American Life. Ironically, you’d get the feeling that some of her fans agree with this narrative, thus reinforcing my theory that there are a good deal of masochists among us to have chosen to endure something they don’t actually appreciate for more than a decade! It’s as if Madonna has a requirement to be purely confessional, or limited to the naïveté of the anthemic disco-stomper. If her music and lyrics don’t address this need more obviously she has failed: she didn’t become Joni Mitchell, so how dare she pick up a guitar and write words that aren’t tantalizing, veiled confessionals; she didn’t grow grey, and become the wistful, nonchalant vagabond, writing enigmatic academic poetry like Patti Smith, and so how dare she manifest as a real sentient human being on a real human journey towards awakening and enlightenment. Oh! And we mustn’t forget that she is the only human being alive to wish to preserve her youthfulness. She should just stop investing in herself altogether beyond her past, acceptable accomplishments, and she should especially unplug from all technology because, well, she’s been old for over ten years and must stop challenging herself and the general public through this outrageous desire to invent, to innovate, to inspire and to be inspired. Otherwise, no matter how interesting it seems, it is “BIZARRE”.

Is it bizarre? Sure, it’s a narrative that deserves to be explored to a degree, but if you repeat something enough, it becomes the truth. “Madonna must fit into the quirky box now if she wants us to qualify this output”! It’s both disheartening and hysterical all at once! 

I have read very little of value that deserves to become the truth in these reviews. I can make up my own mind about what is good and bad, and Madame X is quintessentially Madonna at her best. Whether or not that is good enough for someone else doesn’t interest me much at all unless they are able to tell me why with knowledge, passion and intelligence, which is what a music critic is paid to do after all! I’m still waiting. 

 

THIS SHOULD BE POSTED AS COMMENT UNDER EACH REVIEW, bad and good!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to add the following to that:

A lot of  the media are thrown by the general perception of her in our culture. It makes them second guess and/or downplay any original or positive thought they may have about her. I'm telling you this is exactly why she is very relevant. The fact that a woman evokes sucha a powerful response it makes people discredit their own thoughts. She should b taught in sociology classes, not media or communication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If she can achieve 7 or above from pitchfork (not out of the realm of possibility since they gave Mariah's last album 7.5) and carry through on that trajectory with a couple more, she could touch 80 on metacritic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the reviews are indeed positive. The German press has often been a little weird with her.. first dragging her for Eurovision, then the follow up articles defending her.. same with the music.

Some are biased and havent heard the album, others simply aren't into this album's left field style (or don't want to associate it with M) I think it's riskier than AL for sure..

@acko I saw M on the frontpage of 'de tijd', so at least there's "some" (ahem) promo..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, fandonna said:

Loved this review. Mentioned her long career, but not her age, and took her contrubutions to music seriously.

Also, brilliant post @Herfaceremains 👏👏👏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respect to Dan Whootons full track by track review. Well im going for the radio edit review in comparison 🙄

Here goes!!! My first full listen on Madame X.

Very different, a grower and maybe a Madonna album to be respected as another good album under her belt for the future?? Musically my head is on overload as its a masterpiece with lots going on with some Mawais unusual beats to keep you from falling, very rich with super deep bases and catchy summer beats. A bit tooooo much spanish or Portugese or both and turn down this god damm autotune perhaps. But on the whole its like a different journey on each track and it takes you there musically, spiritually and easily. First full listen frankie rating 77/100. "Looking for Mercy" is my 1st choice track to have been released. Medellíne which was the 1st single is ok, prob my 6th from 15 but was definatly a better 1st single than Madonnas first single pickings in her last 2 pervious albums, bravo M. XxX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Herfaceremains said:

I think it’s important to remember that traditionally music critics have been straight male, rock-oriented, unprogressive, and anti-pop. I don’t see much of an evolution in this, other than in the way we’ve see nerds transform into hipsters because they adhere to the uniform society has prescribed and they went to the gym thanks to the tech industry’s economic clout and subsequent cultural takeover! The very notion of genre-shifting gives these people hives, and so Madonna is mostly not seen as an artist, but as a pillaging, cultural-appropriating, mediocrely talented entertainer who has simply skated over the zeitgeist as if by sheer force of narcissistic determination. These, I believe, are the assumptions of the writers of each 3/5, and some of the 4/5 reviews we have seen.

There has nearly always been a resistance to the notion that Madonna is creative and original. Instead, the only explanation for her success has to come from her deft manipulation and deceit. It’s the very essence of the patriarchy and its pernicious misogyny, and while the popular genres are no longer rock and soul, critics seem to approach Madonna as if she were still defined by another era when that was the case. 

My main point regarding critics and why I personally find them all essentially disappointing is that, as journalists, you’d expect them to seek a unique perspective on their subject. However, nearly every review is written as if based off of some version of a Cliff Notes bio born outside of context and the broader scope of investigation. This leads to a very monotonous, seemingly lazy approach to understanding the music, and most certainly to understanding Madonna herself; it’s as if the writer and reader require a revisionist history lesson in order to even begin to grasp who Madonna is and what she has done, the most irritating common thread in the collective narrative being that Madonna was once an iffy trendsetter by design, but has been assaulting the world with an uneven and mediocre output of trend-chasing albums since she was whipped into submission post-American Life. Ironically, you’d get the feeling that some of her fans agree with this narrative, thus reinforcing my theory that there are a good deal of masochists among us to have chosen to endure something they don’t actually appreciate for more than a decade! It’s as if Madonna has a requirement to be purely confessional, or limited to the naïveté of the anthemic disco-stomper. If her music and lyrics don’t address this need more obviously she has failed: she didn’t become Joni Mitchell, so how dare she pick up a guitar and write words that aren’t tantalizing, veiled confessionals; she didn’t grow grey, and become the wistful, nonchalant vagabond, writing enigmatic academic poetry like Patti Smith, and so how dare she manifest as a real sentient human being on a real human journey towards awakening and enlightenment. Oh! And we mustn’t forget that she is the only human being alive to wish to preserve her youthfulness. She should just stop investing in herself altogether beyond her past, acceptable accomplishments, and she should especially unplug from all technology because, well, she’s been old for over ten years and must stop challenging herself and the general public through this outrageous desire to invent, to innovate, to inspire and to be inspired. Otherwise, no matter how interesting it seems, it is “BIZARRE”.

Is it bizarre? Sure, it’s a narrative that deserves to be explored to a degree, but if you repeat something enough, it becomes the truth. “Madonna must fit into the quirky box now if she wants us to qualify this output”! It’s both disheartening and hysterical all at once! 

I have read very little of value that deserves to become the truth in these reviews. I can make up my own mind about what is good and bad, and Madame X is quintessentially Madonna at her best. Whether or not that is good enough for someone else doesn’t interest me much at all unless they are able to tell me why with knowledge, passion and intelligence, which is what a music critic is paid to do after all! I’m still waiting. 

 

 

1 hour ago, acko said:

I would like to add the following to that:

A lot of  the media are thrown by the general perception of her in our culture. It makes them second guess and/or downplay any original or positive thought they may have about her. I'm telling you this is exactly why she is very relevant. The fact that a woman evokes sucha a powerful response it makes people discredit their own thoughts. She should b taught in sociology classes, not media or communication.

Absolutely! :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sheilacallaham/2019/06/14/madonnas-madame-x-a-blueprint-for-multigenerational-multicultural-artistry/#718e3d4a1dbe

Interesting article...

"Madame X is, at its core, a model strategy for diversity and inclusion with Madonna the executive sponsor driving it to fruition..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...