I happened to flip on MTV canada this morning for lack of better things to watch, and My chemical romance (perhaps one of the most pretentious mainstream bands of the 00's, not to mention absolutely terrible, and only getting worse as time passes) were being interviewed.


Right of the bat, they began comparing themselves to The smashing pumpkins and radiohead.


I woke up a few minutes later, out of breath and light headed, to find him still comparing their new "concept album" to 'Kid A' and 'The infinite sadness.'

Am I the only one who thinks that this is by far one of the worst musical comparisons ever, not to mention light years lamer since it was delivered by the BAND ITSELF?

"oh well yeah my new album sounds just like Tool and Dilute and Hella. genre? well,i'd like to think we're 'techno pop' with southern country influences. "

Yeah.
Seriously, I hate the idea of "emo" seeing as (ironically) it was created to classify music that is overly emotional, but I believe that all art is strongly emotional, otherwise It would not exist in the first place, therefore everything qualifies as "emo" just the same as everything qualifies as "prog" ( I mean,how can anything you put time,effort and heart into not be progressive,at least to you?)

however,recently EMO has sprouted legs and defined itself as something easily classified, and sprouted off into little subgenres like 'xcore' and 'emocore' and whatever else the kids can think up to classify their incredibly bland music. My chemical romance is a fine example of this 'genre' at it's absolute worst, and for them to even think that they are in the same league as Smashing pumpkins, or radiohead, is absolutely fucking absurd.

Yes, but even that wasn't as far off target as this bloody comparison is.



remember when the beatles compared themselves to jesus?