why MBV's Loveless can be a classic ??

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

nothing special

― mm, Friday, 28 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

no one trolling.

― Mr Noodles, Friday, 28 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

mmmmmmmmm.... how does this question go? or as in the cd; my response would be "arwghwilbhulghlhuh.." maybe because they're broken up?

― k. randal, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

it is classic cos it makes me feel nauseous.

― di, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i dont like things that make me nauseous, but i do seem to like this album.

― Ron, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

As shoegazing goes, I think Slowdive's Souvlaki is a better album. Much warmer, and better songs. Although I can't deny that I have a special place in my heart for MBV's noise levels.

― Manny Parsons, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

All truly great albums/records go beyond such words as 'classic'. Classic is as bad a word in the language as 'cool'.

Loveless is not a classic.

― Julio Desouza, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

maybe it was written in an attic

― electric sound of jim, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.