HERE HERE!

this is not a "review" this is a pathetic attack add from a narrow minded journalist who couldent get a job at a real magizine or news paper, of course they sound a little like someone else...
everyone sounds like someone else..
your little buddys Frankee McQueen sound like a bad accedent between led zepplin and pink ffloyd but you dont mention this..
the lions are not even shy to say where they draw influence, this column is almost a plageization from the myspace bio aside from your unintelligent attemt to slag the band.
did you even listen to the album?
when is the last time you came to a show?
you base your opinion on what your friends say you have no substance and are a little man with what i can only assume is a smaller penis

Go back to your anime and stop writeing about music something you clearly do not do objetivly and open mindedly

And FFWD can slag it to for letting this brain numbing opinion column run this further proves why your "Magazine" is free who would actually pay for it, I'm going to be throwing every FFWD mag i come across in the garbage where it belongs

The following may be helpful when interpreting the preceding comment:

add = advertisement
couldent = could not
magizine = magazine
buddys = buddies
accedent = accident
zepplin = zeppelin
ffloyd = floyd
dont = do not
plageization = plagiarization
attemt = attempt
writeing = writing
objetivly = objectively

Ah where would the world be without our trusty internet editors :)

A few questions:

Just out of curiousity, which part of Alan's review isn't objective?

Which part is close-minded? Does being open-minded mean liking everything?

You say the band admits to the influences that Alan brings up, so what makes you think that he's basing the opinion on anything other than the music?

What does Frankie McQueen have to do with it? As far as I can tell, Alan has never talked about that band, so what makes you think they're his buddies, and why would he bring them up in this review?

What makes you think Alan's a fan of anime?

What does the band's live show have to do with it? Are you not allowed to have opinions on records if you haven't seen the band live?

"Objective" was a poor choice of words.

the whole thing is close-minded, being open-minded does not mean he has to like it but pushing an opinion with the intention of swaying others opinions is sad and poor jornalism, I feel like this is somthing I would read on the Fox news website or in the National Inquirer.

The band admits to there influences and draws inspiration but Alan has so chosen to label the Lions as theives implying that all there songs are just rewrites on other musitions art

Frankie Mcqueen was just a example of a band who has gotten fine reviews from FFWD even though they have a similar sound to bands from the past, as far as the buddies thing goes since this coulum is clearly not just the thoughts of Alan Cho but of others at FFWD it is easy for one to assume there "Buddies"

I just know hes a fan of anime... I have my sources

going to shows has alot to do with it, a journalist should research before he trys to get peoples opinions swayed.

he clearly listened to two maybe three songs I would imagine the songs off the exposure C.D. paragraphs like this...

("You can hear Oasis a little too clearly on “Magic.” “Screaming Gun” sounds like a Stone Temple Pilots B-side. The band doesn’t so much wear its influences, a mélange of classic and ’90s radio rock, on its sleeves as it does erect giant billboards with flashing neon arrows pointing at the names of their influences. Lyrically, the songs deal with the struggles of fame and drug addiction and fall too easily into the rock ’n’ roll cliché and, worse, come off unconvincing.")

...Simply prove he listened to 3 songs and formulated a flawed opinion, maybe if he had spoken about the other eight songs included on the album...

Drugs?!?! when were they talking about drug addiction? And can you please find me the Oasis song that sounds even slightly similar to magic what sence does that make?

But what's it matter this is just the typical Calgary B.S. that some bands have to deal with I doubt this "review" will sway very many people, even if it does good anyone who would simply take one persons opinion as the solid facts does not deserve to be a Lions fan

Thanks for responding -- glad to see where you're coming from without all the personal attacks. Still, seems like you're a bit confused on a few points.

"Pushing an opinion with the intention of swaying others opinions is sad and poor jornalism"
That's exactly what every review ever written in any publication, ever, is. An opinion provided by a writer, for the purpose of swaying other people. You might disagree with the opinion, or think that it's flawed. That's cool. But to fault a reviewer for having an opinion is missing the point of a review.

"Frankie Mcqueen was just a example of a band who has gotten fine reviews from FFWD even though they have a similar sound to bands from the past"
Maybe I'm just not finding it, but searching the FFWD site for Frankie Mcqueen pulls up two results. One from last week ("Also on the bill: Savk, better known as the vocalist for Beija Flor, and Calgary rockers Frankie McQueen") and one from over a year ago ("Since 2003, The Lions have been kicking out the jams classic-rock style. After a hiatus, they’re back in action and set to release their new CD, Sounds Familiar, on Friday, February 22. They’ll be playing at The Palomino, supported by Illicit Business, Telly and Frankie McQueen. Visit myspace.com/thelionsrockband.) So, not exactly glowing praise. In fact, the older one sounds more like it's plugging The Lions... weird.

"since this coulum is clearly not just the thoughts of Alan Cho but of others at FFWD..."
Again, pretty sure you're mistaken here. Reviews tend to be the thoughts of the reviewer, not the paper in general.

"going to shows has alot to do with it, a journalist should research before he trys to get peoples opinions swayed"
It's not a review of a live show. Some bands have amazing live shows and awful CDs. Some bands have amazing CDs and awful live shows. If I come across a CD in a store, I don't care if the band is amazing live. I want to know what the CD's like. This is a CD review.

"Drugs?!?!" etc
I don't know about drug references because I haven't listened to the album, but as for an Oasis song that sounds like "Magic," I just looked it up on their MySpace page (see? this review got someone to check out the band...) and the first bit definitely has a little "Champagne Supernova" in it. Not saying it's dead on or anything, but (and this is an opinion) I'd say it's at least "slightly similar." Then again, Oasis used to blatantly (and openly) crib from T.Rex and John Lennon. And some people loved them for it. And some people criticized them for it.

"anyone who would simply take one persons opinion as the solid facts does not deserve to be a Lions fan"
Exactly right. People shouldn't be afraid to check something out just because a critic doesn't like it. And a critic shouldn't be afraid to dislike something just because it's local -- B.S. would be a situation where anyone who dislikes a local band is labelled an unintelligent, close-minded, small-dicked failure. Thank God no one around here is narrow-minded enough to make a pathetic attack like that.

A review is a review. People need to understand that each music journalist has their own taste in music. They're critical, and if they don't like something they're going to tell you about it. The Lions are fantastic. I like them, but I also see where he's going with his article. He's not saying they're terrible, he just likes his rock 'n roll the way it "should" be. He's encouraging the band to have more of a sense of their own, rather than trying to portray a bunch of the others bands here in Calgary and everywhere else that are all sounding a little too similar. Well, at least that's what I'm getting from it. It's a damn good review. Reviews are meant for constructive cricism. The band should benefit from this.

ok I disagree with this review, one question. what is rock and roll? and how "should" rock and roll be? NICKELBACK?

The only people who are close minded in this discussion are those who aren't willing to take criticism with a grain of salt. Demanding someone change their opinion on anything is just side-splittingly nonsensical, especially when it comes to music. Arguing about the definition of rock and roll is like arguing the definition of any genre. It's (a) highly amusing for a person like myself and many others who enjoy witnessing stupid arguments, and (b) going to make you look like an idiot. Everyone has their own idea of what sounds are barricaded into which genres and there's many who are a lot more borderless. Anyway, carry on. This is fun. :)

your comment was,
"He's not saying they're terrible, he just likes his rock 'n roll the way it "should" be"
so with a comment like that, enlighten me, how should rock and roll be? (in your opinion) I agree this is a stupid argument, but to say the lions are not a rock and roll group is ridiculous. I have been to a few shows and own all there CD's, im only saying they deserve better than cho's lazy, misguiding attempt of a review. I honestly don't think he listened to the whole album.

Internet, Internet, dearest Internet... Calm down. It's only too obvious that the unforgivable mistake Al made was giving a middling review to a local artist. We all know that anything short of gushing to the point where you loose control of three or more bodily functions is pretty much the same as single handedly killing the local scene (of whichever medium was being reviewed, natch).

Sounds like The Lions (and their fans) need to learn how to cope with bad press.

;)

I can't imagine how a journalist reviewing a piece of media is supposed to avoid stating their opinion?

A review is an opinion and if you don't like it don't take the reviewers advice.

Well...I thought I would wade into this now older convo....maybe someone will read it, maybe not.

After reading this review and listening to the album, I feel I can safely say that I tend to agree with the reviewer (not something I do often here at the FFWD). When I first heard the band, I thought I might've been listening to early Oasis tracks before they were discovered. To my amazement, it was indeed The Lions: a local Calgary band.

The argument on this comment board seemed to have stemed from a Lions fan who didn't like the obvious being called out. Just because a band makes you think of another band doesn't mean that band has no merit, however, if the band seems to be almost mirroring the band they sound like than it is obvious that they really do not possess much of their own identity.

The fact is, The Lions are a good group of musicians. They can sing, apparently they can write...but the singer sounds like Noel Gallagher and that irks me because Gallagher is so famous for not having much of an identity himself (sorry to Oasis fans). The fact is, when you listened to Oasis, you were listening to AC/DC, the Beatles, Ozzy....pretty much every major rock act from the last 40 years. And make no mistake, if you think that was by accident, you're living in a fantasy. By the time Oasis made it, the major labels in the record industry were no longer about making music...no, by then it was all about money and if it wasn't broke, they didn't fix it (or if it sold in a previous era, perhaps we could take advantage of more markets by snagging the boomers, X-ers AND their kids!!).

Sadly, I was in the group of those kids and although I fell for the trick that was Oasis, I quickly learned and moved on with my life (and got rid of all their albums). The Lions obviously didn't, and thus borrowed a lot of nuances that came with Oasis. It's not sad that way....it's just they should probably just get on with it and become an Oasis tribute band....

....they're already most of the way there.