Slant magazine has given Sol Invictus the most damning review we’ve read so far, awarding a Metacritic-average shattering 2.5/5. They reserve special opprobrium for Mike Patton:
“On Sol Invictus, though, Patton doesn’t seem to trust his voice as much as he once did. With the exception of the tortured ballad “Matador” and the militaristic “Motherfucker,” he sticks primarily to his middle range and falls back too often on studio wizardry and a gruff affectation to cover his vocal limitations. Patton could still sing circles around pretty much any rock vocalist, but compared to his genre-mashing work as the Frank Zappa of the post-grunge age, leading the cheerfully experimental supergroups Lovage, Tomahawk, and Fantômas, his work here is oddly tepid.”
Slant magazine has the most stupid review scores like giving a stupid, souless movie like resident evil retribution 8.8/10 and giving clever, smart movies like wreck it ralph 3.3/10
how purely stupid the staff members are
Given that it’s fairly universally agreed upon that Patton possesses one of the best voices in the business it’s rather nonsensical to mention his “limitations”…I’m sure Rembrandt had his limitations as well but the point…?
If the reviewer is implying that Patton’s voice has degraded over time then I wish he had the courage of his convictions to simply say so. His point would be laughable…but he’d at least sound less like someone trying to poke holes into something commendable simply for attention.
Not just in your eyes… some people like making assumptions though. Gives them some thing important to say I guess.
Not based on what I heard/felt in Philadelphia. Does this seem like a guy whose vocals are limited? https://youtu.be/XQzfBGeIMwE?t=2m49s
Which “vocal limitations”? Ridiculous in my eyes.