Your Controversial Opinions on DT

[KevShmev]

My point is this: who cares if it is dated?

Not every song has to be timeless, like it has to sound like it could have been recorded at any time in history.

[MirrorMask]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

What does that even mean?

That it dates the song to a very late 80s, beginning of 1990s period? Jeeze.

So one simple line dates the whole song? Even after they've made sure to change it for all live performances?   

Uh? I never noticed this. What does James sing instead?

[Max Kuehnau]

No need to call that opinion ridiculous. It's controversial, perhaps, but not ridiculous. LTL does sound dated, particularly because of 'the 90s bring new questions' lyric.

Take the Time freaking rules.

What does that even mean?

That it dates the song to a very late 80s, beginning of 1990s period? Jeeze.

So one simple line dates the whole song? Even after they've made sure to change it for all live performances?   

Uh? I never noticed this. What does James sing instead?

"and these days bring new questions[...]

[MirrorMask]

As I said... never noticed it! I guess I was so used to sing in my mind the original lyrics that I never paid attention at how he changed them : D

[Max Kuehnau]

As I said... never noticed it! I guess I was so used to sing in my mind the original lyrics that I never paid attention at how he changed them : D

yeah, Learning To Live still is a good piece so nevermind,eh?

[ToT-147]

My point is this: who cares if it is dated?

Not every song has to be timeless, like it has to sound like it could have been recorded at any time in history.

I agree with that... well, actually, that would be impossible to do! lol... And I'm of course only speaking for myself, but it does care, if you tend to dislike songs that sound dated... I think is the same reason why some of us don't like very old songs or don't even try to search out music before the 90's or the 2000's...

"and these days bring new questions[...]

Actually, I checked, and at least in the two latest "official" versions of the song, is a 50-50... In the Happy Holidays version he does sing "and these days", but in the 'Back to Budokan' version he sings the original line..

[425]

I'd say we're now easily within a time frame where he could sing "the twenties."

[ToT-147]

I'd say we're now easily within a time frame where he could sing "the twenties."

That's... creepy..

[lucasembarbosa]

Overture 2028

[The Walrus]

Metropolis Part 3: Learning To Live As A Reincarnated Trans Woman In 2028

[Zook]

Metropolis Part 3: Learning To Live As A Reincarnated Trans Woman In 2028

Scene 4: Did You Just Assume My Gender?

[IDontNotDoThings]

Progressive metal? More like progesterone metal 

[ToT-147]

Progressive metal? More like progesterone metal 

 

[Dublagent66]

OMFG!!  I&W sounds dated because it was written 27 years ago.  It was prog metal ahead of its time (back then), but now....well it's just dated. 

[Max Kuehnau]

If Portnoy hadn't left, DT would not exist anymore today. (and we would have missed their two best albums, or probably rather three, given that DT14 will hopefully be the successor to DT12 in that respect)

[erwinrafael]

OMFG!!  I&W sounds dated because it was written 27 years ago.  It was prog metal ahead of its time (back then), but now....well it's just dated. 

No. Just 2 songs sound dated.

[The Walrus]

I think SFAM is hugely overrated and kind of boring in a lot of places. I also love The Astonishing, and just the other night was called a DT fanboy for defending it against people unfairly knocking it... right after saying there are 4 or 5 DT albums I don't actually like 

[pg1067]

just the other night was called a DT fanboy for defending it against people unfairly knocking it.

"Unfairly knocking it"?  Was it "unfair" for any reason other than that you love it?

[The Walrus]

just the other night was called a DT fanboy for defending it against people unfairly knocking it.

"Unfairly knocking it"?  Was it "unfair" for any reason other than that you love it?

I am looking at the thread of comments now and I am quoting verbatim:

"The Astonishing is trash and just goes to show how sterile and pointless Dream Theater have become. "
"The astonishing is a boring album. The only good album with Mike Mangini on it is their self titled. Everything before that was amazing"
"Nah. Modern DT is trash."

Basically a combination of "DT without MP stinks," "it's boring and like listening to Disney songs," "Modern DT sucks" etc. and I got called a fanboy for saying that although TA is not for everyone it is a well written album and it's something different which is what DT used to do all the time - different stuff. It gets a lot of flack, unfairly, for not being 100% metal or ultraprog. A lot of the criticism is just over that. "This album sucks, because it has ballads and isn't heavy, it's just a gay Disney musical" and all sorts of other stupid crap. Pointless? The whole band is 'trash?' Just because you dislike the album? Sure...

Actual criticism is fair. Closeminded commentary like that is not.

[Dublagent66]

OMFG!!  I&W sounds dated because it was written 27 years ago.  It was prog metal ahead of its time (back then), but now....well it's just dated. 

No. Just 2 songs sound dated.

Most of us really don't care.  They are still great songs.

[pg1067]

I am looking at the thread of comments now and I am quoting verbatim:

"The Astonishing is trash and just goes to show how sterile and pointless Dream Theater have become. "
"The astonishing is a boring album. The only good album with Mike Mangini on it is their self titled. Everything before that was amazing"
"Nah. Modern DT is trash."

Basically a combination of "DT without MP stinks," "it's boring and like listening to Disney songs," "Modern DT sucks" etc. and I got called a fanboy for saying that although TA is not for everyone it is a well written album and it's something different which is what DT used to do all the time - different stuff. It gets a lot of flack, unfairly, for not being 100% metal or ultraprog. A lot of the criticism is just over that. "This album sucks, because it has ballads and isn't heavy, it's just a gay Disney musical" and all sorts of other stupid crap. Pointless? The whole band is 'trash?' Just because you dislike the album? Sure...

Actual criticism is fair. Closeminded commentary like that is not.

Well...I don't agree with the "trash" comment, and I haven't described music as "gay" in the last quarter century, but those comments about TA are consistent with how I generally feel about it.  I also don't agree that "modern DT is trash," but that's not really about TA.

You have to accept that TA is polarizing, and in a social media setting, you're going to get a lot of crass commentary and folks who can't articulate their opinions in terms beyond "sucks" and "gay."  That's why I tend to avoid "the comments section" and stick to places like this where folks can disagree with each other respectfully.

[The Walrus]

I do accept it's polarizing. I accepted it back when they first announced a whole concept with characters. One of my favorite artists does that exact same thing over 10 albums. I get it.

But it is unfair criticism when you start calling a band 'trash' or 'gay' or 'awful' etc. because one member is gone, or because they made an album that doesn't click with you (not you specifically, just in general). TA has received a ton of backlash like that from closeminded fools. There's one way to articulate your dislike of an album - eloquently, respectfully, or at least elaborating on what it is that rubs you the wrong way.

But I also don't like getting called a fanboy when I point out said unfair criticism, especially right after I talk about how overrated I think SFAM is, and how much I dislike BC&SL.    It just shows their lack of critical thinking.

[pg1067]

But it is unfair criticism when you start calling a band 'trash' or 'gay' or 'awful' etc. because one member is gone, or because they made an album that doesn't click with you (not you specifically, just in general). TA has received a ton of backlash like that from closeminded fools. There's one way to articulate your dislike of an album - eloquently, respectfully, or at least elaborating on what it is that rubs you the wrong way.

But I also don't like getting called a fanboy when I point out said unfair criticism, especially right after I talk about how overrated I think SFAM is, and how much I dislike BC&SL.    It just shows their lack of critical thinking.

Well...I don't know where all this occurred, but you're describing the internet and social media in general.  If there are a bunch of likeminded folks, they're going to gang up on the person who thinks differently.  I "follow" a Facebook group for a radio station that was on the air in SoCal from the mid-80s to the mid-90s, and some of the others in the group incredibly inarticulate and close-minded.  When I sense that that element is rising to the surface, I tend to walk away and ignore.

I think it's perfectly "fair" to describe an album as "awful" if you don't like it (for whatever reason).  Even "trash" is not, IMO, "unfair."  "Gay" is different (mostly because of the current political climate -- back in the day, lots of folks referred to certain bands (e.g., Poison) as "gay"), and I agree that being called a "fanboy" just because you like something isn't really "fair," but again, that's the internet/social media for you.

Thinking SFAM is overrated certainly isn't going to be a popular opinion (I certainly disagree, but I'm not going to tell you you're wrong because opinions can't be "right" or "wrong").  BC&SL, on the other hand, is pretty commonly regarded as being near the bottom of DT's catalog.

[The Walrus]

Believe me, I'm no stranger to hot takes or unpopular opinions. Better to be honest about what you like and simply enjoy what appeals to the individual. But while I don't think calling something awful is inherently unfair (I think Threshold and Redemption are awful, and that's as succinct as I can sum up my feelings on them), I do think it's ridiculous the amount of hate The Astonishing gets just for being a concept album that isn't super heavy on the metal or prog or because Mike Portnoy isn't involved. Like... a lot of the hate it receives is unfair. This was just in a Facebook post, by the way. I'm not bothered at all by it. Just pointing out how I was called a fanboy for defending it literally minutes after saying I didn't think SFAM was hot shit.  That's all. IDGAF how people actually conduct themselves with respect to an album but don't drag me into it when the logic you use is so black and white and elementary

EDIT: And a lot of people give TA crap for its story, but... SFAM's story is about a love triangle with a girl and two brothers and someone dies and those same people get reincarnated 70 years later. IMO it's not exactly high quality stuff.

[bosk1]

I think both stories are pretty cool, actually.  You can make any story sound pretty banal and stupid by boiling it down to its lowest denominator.  But both have plenty to offer.

[pg1067]

I do think it's ridiculous the amount of hate The Astonishing gets just for being a concept album that isn't super heavy on the metal or prog or because Mike Portnoy isn't involved. Like... a lot of the hate it receives is unfair. This was just in a Facebook post, by the way. I'm not bothered at all by it. Just pointing out how I was called a fanboy for defending it literally minutes after saying I didn't think SFAM was hot shit.  That's all. IDGAF how people actually conduct themselves with respect to an album but don't drag me into it when the logic you use is so black and white and elementary

EDIT: And a lot of people give TA crap for its story, but... SFAM's story is about a love triangle with a girl and two brothers and someone dies and those same people get reincarnated 70 years later. IMO it's not exactly high quality stuff.

Again, my perspective on TA is that I've not been able to get into it -- either musically or lyrically.  I think I've listened to it all the way through three times, but never entirely in the same sitting.  Based on that, I would describe it as fairly uninteresting.  However, I don't feel like I've given the album a "fair" chance, so I've not passed any sort of "final judgment" on it and typically exclude it when ranking DT's albums, etc.

I agree that panning TA because MP wasn't involved is silly.  Panning it for being a concept album while, at the same time, liking SFAM for that reason is inconsistent, but there's nothing wrong with disliking concept albums in general.  It's also not unreasonable to be generally opposed to concept albums but to like SFAM and not like TA (or vice versa) for whatever reason.

As far as the stories, I don't know the TA story well enough, but I do know that it's at least a little derivative of the story in "2112," which is entirely derivative of Ayn Rand's novella Anthem.  I have no problem with the story in SFAM -- indeed, I like it a lot.  However, it's well-known that it's very similar to the story in the film Dead Again.

You can make any story sound pretty banal and stupid by boiling it down to its lowest denominator.

Romeo and Juliet:  Two young emo teens marry without parental consent and then commit suicide over a misunderstanding.
The Hunchback of Notre Dame:  A retarded child and his father both fall for mysterious woman; father arranges to have woman killed, son kills father and son commits suicide.
Crime and Punishment:  A broke college dropout kills a man because he thinks that's what "great men" do; he then confesses at the urging of a prostitute.

Etc., etc.

[MirrorMask]

MacBeth: some wtiches troll a noble into becoming a power hungry king, with the situation biting him in the ass.

No, even dumbed down, Macbeth is still awesome, that's the exception to the rule 

The story in SFAM was great, it was an unusual theme for a concept and having an actual twist with previous misdirection in an album is something quite rare. Sure, then you watch Dead Again and well, I'm not saying it's like listening to Stockholm Syndrome after hearing Never Enough, but.... well, not so distant either.

I also like the story in The Astonishing, maybe it's a bit unbalanced between the two acts, but overall it was fun to see it unfold. I had a legitimate shocked moment when Arhys died, I didn't expect it at all.

[IDontNotDoThings]

I also like the story in The Astonishing, maybe it's a bit unbalanced between the two acts, but overall it was fun to see it unfold. I had a legitimate shocked moment when Arhys died, I didn't expect it at all.

Spoilers 

[Architeuthis]

I also like the story in The Astonishing, maybe it's a bit unbalanced between the two acts, but overall it was fun to see it unfold. I had a legitimate shocked moment when Arhys died, I didn't expect it at all.

Spoilers 

I think it's safe to say that it's too late to have spoilers in TA,  being that it's nearly three years into it. I'm sure you are being fecitious right?

[PetFish]

SFaM - Murder two people in the past and get away with it and then murder one of them again in your next life and get away with that as well.  Murder is easy and consequence-free for all time.

[MirrorMask]

I also like the story in The Astonishing, maybe it's a bit unbalanced between the two acts, but overall it was fun to see it unfold. I had a legitimate shocked moment when Arhys died, I didn't expect it at all.

Spoilers 

I think it's safe to say that it's too late to have spoilers in TA,  being that it's nearly three years into it. I'm sure you are being fecitious right?

Yes, since he used the green font color which here means sarcasm

[Dublagent66]

SFaM - Murder two people in the past and get away with it and then murder one of them again in your next life and get away with that as well.  Murder is easy and consequence-free for all time.

Yeah, unless you're Biff Tannen, hopped in the Delorian but forgot to give the sports almanac to yourself and killed your grandmother instead.

[Cool Chris]

Murder is easy and consequence-free for all time.

Sure if you last name is Kennedy.

[IDontNotDoThings]

Controversial opinion: I think the Beautiful Agony section in ANTR works perfectly within the track & shouldn't have been its own song. The very reason it works so well is because it's such a contrast to the tone of the rest of the song without being sudden or feeling like it doesn't belong (not to mention that the main riff in the section being a really good motif of the main riff in ANTR). If they had separated the track, I highly doubt it'd be held in such high regard, & I certainly wouldn't adore the track as much as I do if it'd been separated. Also, the transition into it is easily my favourite part of the song.

I do agree that the part after should've been shortened though, I won't deny that. 

[MirrorMask]

Indeed, that's the only issue with the song... starting heavy and then going into the Beautiful Agony part is perfect and works quite well. It's what comes after that feels disjointed and "We have to make this song 16 minutes long".