We most certainly can

The only reason I watch Justified is because I pirated the first season. Since then, I've bought the first two seasons on DVD.

I love the book and the movie.  Gregory Peck is the tits.  That is all.

@avclub-a62344a91db0bb372d136f651af0ac97:disqus Yeah I saw it and read it, then attempted to take over the comments.  I'm glad you guys got around to it, as I think that fun. is really deserving of recognition for their ability to produce good pop.

When was this?  I heard of fun. when I saw Panic! at the Disco in Columbus, but they were touring with Funeral Party at the time.  When I was going to see Panic! in Grand Rapids, they were touring with Foxy Shazam and Patrick Stump.

That makes sense.  I didn't really care for any of the overt auto-tuning, as it seemed superfluous.  But the drum machines aren't bad or annoying.

I don't think think the God-fearing Hot Topic set (assuming it exists) would appreciate the atheistic bent of some of fun.'s songs

I think I'd rate them about the same.  Mostly because fun. didn't meet my expectations and Sleigh Bells surpassed mine.  Of course, trying to compare baroque/orchestral pop to ironic indie metal is kind of difficult.

Yeah, that's what I meant. fun. is definitely more respectable, and their music is catchier.  Also, fun. is more lyrically talented; they don't seem insufferably try-hard like Pete Wentz was.

Comparisons to Queen are fair, and I would tack on Jellyfish as well.  Don't know if I'd consider them emo, though.  I think the punctuation is to distinguish themselves from another band of the same name.

And since I'm currently attempting to take over this thread, let m just say that fun. is definitely worth a listen if you're a fan of pop that is neither shallow nor trite.  Also, they're amazing in concert, very energetic, and just plain fun (yes, their name suits them).

That's a pretty good way to describe their sound.  Another way to describe it would be a serious version of Fall Out Boy.

About fucking time this band made it on AVC.  How did they not get a proper album review on Tuesday?

I second that

Is it just me, or does it seem like Duffy is somewhat scared of Quarles?  Because if he is, then either Duffy is a better man than we've been led to believe or Qaurles is whole new shade of depraved.

I like NMH and Jeff Mangum (I even bought the NMH vinyl box set), but I don't view NMH as anything more than an enjoyable diversion.  It's not that NMH is terrible; I just don't see it as transcendental or anything like that.  It's good music, it's enjoyable music, but it's not earth-shattering—at least to me.

Well, I'm glad that MPAA is taking a stand to protect children's innocence.  Now if only we could find some children with some innocence to protect.

To be clear, though, if a band is going to make an image for itself (and some do), discussing that image and the merits thereof is certainly fair game.  I just don't think it particularly relevant in an album review.

Yeah, I got the feeling that the C+ grade was more reflective of Sleigh Bells than of "Reign of Terror."  Personally, I think that "Reign of Terror" was worth a B.  It certainly wasn't as terrible a C+ would let on.

Well, it will be on my year-end list, which is the only that counts.  It often amazes me how often critics overlook good music.  Of course, it probably doesn't help that there is a ton of new music being produced annually, and trying to keep up with it, in the sense of simply being aware, is going to be difficult.…