User Score
Universal acclaim- based on 54 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 47 out of 54
-
Mixed: 4 out of 54
-
Negative: 3 out of 54
Review this album
-
BloodflowersYour Score0 out of 10User ScoreUniversal acclaim- based on 54 Ratings
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- By date
- Most helpful
-
BenjaminBunnyApr 17, 2004No my friends, this is most definitely NOT a masterpiece on par with "Disintegration," and it is most definitely NOT their worst album either ("Wild Mood Swings" gets my vote for that). It's just The Cure doing Cure-esque songs with dense Cure production. No alarms and no surprises. Listenable from beginning to end as well as forgettable. For dedicated fans or completists only.
-
Awards & Rankings
-
Fans who have waited patiently for a proper follow-up to 1989's acclaimed Disintegration should be pleased, if not necessarily bowled over by Bloodflowers, a deeply felt album with a similarly downcast mood.
-
PunctureSmith focuses on his own artistic/existential questions to the exclusion of all else, including the record's production, which is completely monotonous, and its pace, which falls somewhere between a plod and a trudge. [#46, p.47]
-
Smith is incapable of writing five bad songs in a row; even hopeless records (1992's Wish) sport some saving grace ("Friday I'm in Love"). But he can write four bad songs in a row, and Cure albums tend to leak filler like an attic spilling insulation. The latest, Bloodflowers, is half dismissible droning, an unforgivable ratio considering it's only nine tracks long.