<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics: Comments on Black is a good colour</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 3 Aug 2003 02:42:26 EDT</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by Sean Hackbarth</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/31/152531.php#comment-14231</link>
<description>&quot;Black Like Sunday&quot; is much, much better than &quot;Manic Moonlight&quot; but they just don&#039;t seem to have that spark. &quot;Johnny&quot; is killer, but few of the other songs left anything lasting.

And can someone explain who&#039;s bright idea it was not to number the songs on the back of the CD? When I listen to in in my car, I have to guess what song is playing.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">14231@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 3 Aug 2003 02:42:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Natalie</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/31/152531.php#comment-14149</link>
<description>I can&#039;t speak for this new LP (haven&#039;t heard it -- YET), but gotta say ditto to the praises given to King&#039;s X. Whatta band! Whatta sound! Whatta message! 

I love these guys.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">14149@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2003 17:21:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Tom Johnson</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/31/152531.php#comment-14142</link>
<description>I&#039;m definitely going to have to voice the dissenting opinion on this one - this album is one big stinking pile of turd.  I&#039;ve never had such an incredible let down by a band, and often, when let down, I find that I eventually really enjoy the album because I had preconceived notions that drifted away after several times through.  The only preconceived notions I had about this album was that it would be at least decent.  Boy was I wrong - this is some of the lamest, cheesiest hair-band metal to slip out of the coma it was thankfully put into by Nirvana in 1991.  This album is just embarassingly bad.  There&#039;s a reason they left stuff like &quot;Rock Pile&quot; behind - because it&#039;s amateurish crap.

Man, sorry Marty, I really enjoy your posts, but this is one album that I have to help warn people away from.  Chalk it up to the love/hate division in metal between what happened between 1986-91 and what happened afterwards and before that . . . (which is what I prefer, obviously.)</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">14142@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:25:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by mike</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/07/31/152531.php#comment-14141</link>
<description>I saw them open for Dream Theatre, which I went with a friend as a favor, since this is not my type of music. I was blown away by how good King&#039;s X was, and how sad that they have to open for much less talented bands (I thought Dream Theatre was total bombast), and that few people in the audience appreciated them. Truly it is a cold, heartless world.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">14141@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:18:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>