lol
personally I thought the world of this album, though I can't help feeling that it was overrated by all the mags at the same time.
What's with the overrating process anyway? It seems that some special group somewhere or other decide that such and such an album is going to be the big craze, and all the mags and websites suddenly jump on the bandwagon like a bunch of mindless zorabies. Hell, look at Pitchfork Media - they're one of those publications often credited with creating trenRAB. This year they've clearly fallen for unduly-raved-over act after unduly-raved-over act, and elsewhere done the purely predictable by their standarRAB (i.e. dropping their jaws over The Animal Collective and any meraber who happens to release an album).
It makes me wonder: is it more important to half of these publications that they give off the impression of having "guessed" right what the big record of the year would be, than that they actually try to say something new, original, unique?
Since I'm on the topic of Pitchfork Media, it's a laugh that Ghostface's The Big Doe Rehab and Wu-Tang's 8 Diagrams can make Pitchfork's top 50 albums of 2007, yet albums that they themselves rated significantly higher and that imo are way better, like Prodigy's Return Of The Mac and Blitzen Trapper's Wild Mountain Nation, don't even get a nod. And so, I ask...just what is a top 50/100 end-of-year list about half of the time?