The Cure

1982 / 2005
Reviewed by: Scott McKeating
Reviewed on: 2005-07-11

Log In to Post Comments
Posted 07/11/2005 - 10:17:23 AM by bassman08:
 What a coincidence, because I just bought this yesterday. I must say that it is really enjoyable (well, as much as a Cure album CAN be enjoyable....). One thing though...your review doesn't really SAY much about the actual merits of the album. "Pornography may not be pornography but you still might want to carry it in a brown paper bag." Huh? What does that even mean? If I had read this review before the album it would have made no difference in my descision to buy it. You didn't really say anything about how the songs SOUNDED or weather or not the album was good when you listened to it. All that you did was re-iterate parts of the liner notes, which we could have found out by buying the album (or doing a quick google search of it). I don't know, but this just seems more like an album synopsis from the record label than like a review...the other reviews of the deluxe editions (Faith, 16 Seconds, 3 Imaginary Boys) all talked about the quality of the album as a whole, and analyzed the original album as well as the quality of the remaster, the packaging and the extra disc, and did it quite thoroughly. This review just seems a bit sparse, and there could be more to it.
Posted 07/11/2005 - 10:49:30 AM by scottmckeating:
 Just to respond to a few of your points… I tried to talk more about the feel of the LP than the sonic specifics (which I touched upon in paragraphs 2, 5 and 4). For me it’s essntially a heavy lyrical / thematic album and the music is very secondary. I wanted to get more into what it was about as opposed to the release details side of it. I think I only reference the liner notes in that four word quote in an attempt to show what Smith was trying to do, the rest (for better or for worse) spilled from my head.. And the last line was meant to sum up the fact that even though it isn't actually porn you might still not want to advertise the fact that you are carrying around or love an LP so incredibly messed up and ugly. Maybe I should've just said that….Appreciate you taking the time to respond.
Posted 07/11/2005 - 11:26:55 AM by bassman08:
 OK, thanks for clarifying some of those things for me. But are you trying to say that you like the album or that you don't? Maybe that's all I'm getting at. Obviously, you gave it a "B", so you can't think it's too bad, but I couldn't tell from the review how much you liked it. I wasn't trying to be too critical, because I thought it was well written and everything, I was just seriously confused by what exactly you were trying to say in it. And as far as it being a heavy lyrical album, I agree, but I think one of the reasons that attracted me to it in the first place was that when I listened to it the music itself was so strange and out dark and mysterious. I psychedelic atmosphere that surrounds the lyrics. That being said, I can now understand the "brown paper bag" sentance, because, yeah, it is messed up - but I still find something fascinating about it. Which, ultimatly, may be something that could describe real pornography. Uhh, wow, now that you explained it I understand this review a whole lot more (except for if you like it or not).
Posted 07/13/2005 - 12:07:52 AM by Andrew_TSKS:
 You say something about six albums at the beginning of this review. However, "Pornography" was actually only The Cure's fourth album, after "Three Imaginary Boys," "Seventeen Seconds," and "Faith." "Boys Don't Cry" and "Happily Ever After" were merely repackages of those albums for United States release, if those were what you were thinking of, and even if so I'm still not sure what the sixth might have been. Either way, there were only three real Cure albums before this one.