Room On Fire
by The Strokes
  • Record Label: RCA
  • Release Date: Oct 28, 2003
User Score
8.7

Universal acclaim- based on 330 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 305 out of 330
  2. Mixed: 14 out of 330
  3. Negative: 11 out of 330

Review this album

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. xqcTF
    Aug 12, 2022
    8
    After releasing "Is This It" two years prior, The Strokes had a lot to live up to. "Room On Fire", I believe, expands on the ideas shown in their debut, but with much better production. "12:51" offers a really soothing guitar harmonisation under the vocals that gives a really good vibe and is super catchy. "Under Control" has a very important drum fill that kicks off each chorus, creatingAfter releasing "Is This It" two years prior, The Strokes had a lot to live up to. "Room On Fire", I believe, expands on the ideas shown in their debut, but with much better production. "12:51" offers a really soothing guitar harmonisation under the vocals that gives a really good vibe and is super catchy. "Under Control" has a very important drum fill that kicks off each chorus, creating an amazing energy and bravado. The only negative thing I feel is that there are some tracks that aren't as good as the rest, but I still find myself enjoying.… Expand
  2. It'sme.
    Nov 13, 2003
    7
    Pretty good album that takes at least 5 good listens before you "get" it. Don't hate them because critics praise them. If you're gonna hate them, hate them because you don't like their music. Not many bands make a sophomore album as good as this.
  3. JonathanH
    Apr 13, 2004
    7
    It's not the great album some people say it is, it's not as good as their first, but it's still a solid rock album that knows when to quit before it gets tedious
  4. Tyler
    Jul 4, 2004
    7
    People expect so much from each new album of an artist/group. I guess that is granted given modern economics. However, even though costs and spending may have changed I don't think the creative process has changed much. I don't often like to mention the Beatles much in reviews, as they are on a different plain - but their body of work will best illustrate my point. The first People expect so much from each new album of an artist/group. I guess that is granted given modern economics. However, even though costs and spending may have changed I don't think the creative process has changed much. I don't often like to mention the Beatles much in reviews, as they are on a different plain - but their body of work will best illustrate my point. The first four Beatles records were seemingly carbon-copies of each other (and much of the songs were covers). Give the Strokes some time to evolve and incorporate other influences into sound and perhaps we will be blessed with a modern day "Rubber Soul", "Sgt. Pepper", or "Abbey Road" (whatever your preference). Although that seems unlikey, I'm not sure what other paths the VU/Television sound has left to take: punk, noise pop, shoegaze - hopefully there's something left.… Expand
  5. BryanB
    Dec 5, 2003
    7
    Overall, a good album....typical Strokes. Nothing new, but consistent with the quality of their last album. Why change a winning formula??
  6. Vampire25
    Feb 11, 2011
    7
    The Strokes debut album Is This It redefined garage punk rock. But there second album Room On Fire was a slight disappointment. The songs aren't as catchy and they're not as vibrant as the tracks on their first album. But still nevertheless a good album. It had some really strong tracks and some really not so strong tracks. All In All, A little bit of a disappointment but still a good album. B
  7. frightopia
    Mar 10, 2023
    7
    Didn't have any major standouts, but it was still an enjoyable listen! Really no skips
  8. thirdman
    Jan 3, 2009
    6
    For the band whose appeal almost entirely depended upon its catchy song-writing skills, it was nigh impossible to repeat its intensity of the 1st album, especially because all the songs were coming out of one guy's brain. Some song-writers are smarter about it, and don't show all their tricks in one album and depend more on the variety of their musical craftsmanship (like Dylan, For the band whose appeal almost entirely depended upon its catchy song-writing skills, it was nigh impossible to repeat its intensity of the 1st album, especially because all the songs were coming out of one guy's brain. Some song-writers are smarter about it, and don't show all their tricks in one album and depend more on the variety of their musical craftsmanship (like Dylan, Bowie, etc) and become known for their musical longevity, but clearly Casablancas wasn't going about his creative process that way, and it shows in this 2nd album. Namely, he seems to have run out of his melodic ideas, and the majority of the songs in this album sound like the songs in the 1st album (or weaker variations of them). That is not just due to the fact that everybody in the band plays exactly the same way as in the 1st album (as many pointed out), or that it was produced in the identical manner as in the 1st, but it certainly doesn't help in terms of painfully highlighting the obvious lack of variety in its song-writings. That said, it's a decent album, and it would've been rated higher if everybody on this planet hasn't already listened to their 1st album millions of times.… Expand
  9. JonH
    Apr 7, 2005
    6
    It's a okay listen, not nearly as good as their first album, like all the bad reviews say, it's just a repeat, and not nearly as memorable
  10. ThomasB.
    Nov 11, 2003
    6
    This is a great album, and worthy of its high praise. Every good album ever made has one commonality: great songs. This one is no exception. They're just quality songs by a band with a lead singer who's got a great voice. Better than the first album, I think.
  11. JasonD
    Mar 30, 2004
    6
    One half of a good album. If only the album was more consistant but there are definitely songs which become a chore to listen to. It's also frustrating that this is all the material the band can come up with since Is This It. Not to mention that the recorded versions of the songs played during the Is This It tour are very disappointing.
  12. [Anonymous]
    Oct 11, 2003
    5
    The sounds hasn't changed....only flaw is that mostly every song on the album is similar..they could have changed it up a bit
  13. rachelz
    Aug 17, 2004
    5
    yea, i know they're filthy rich kids who got their career moving through daddy's wallet, and, to make matters more annoying, flaunt their hypocritical bohemia more than their musical chops, this album is decent...but by no means great. if they just played the damn songs instead of trying ultra hard to make themselves sound low-fi and "cool", as if there really is some yea, i know they're filthy rich kids who got their career moving through daddy's wallet, and, to make matters more annoying, flaunt their hypocritical bohemia more than their musical chops, this album is decent...but by no means great. if they just played the damn songs instead of trying ultra hard to make themselves sound low-fi and "cool", as if there really is some desperation on the line (like these guys couldn't hang back out in their daddies' penthouses on the upper east side if their music didn't work out). the velvets did the low-budget, feedback thang almost 40 years ago--and did it much better and more provocatively. not to mention "psychocadndy" 20 years ago by the jamc. it's time to move on. basically, less thrift store "really, i'm not loaded" juvenile schtick and more production would probably equal more sincerity and honesty, which would help the songs out immensely. and i would probably listen to it again.… Expand
  14. Chris182
    Apr 26, 2021
    5
    Room on Fire is one of the most overrated albums of the 2000s. There is not much here to come back to (besides a few good songs). The production is unbearably gritty and Julian's vocals are extremely bland and boring to listen to. Thank god the Regina Spektor song is only a bonus track because that is easily one of the worst songs for the 2000s.
    Best Songs: Reptilia, The End Has No End,    Room on Fire is one of the most overrated albums of the 2000s. There is not much here to come back to (besides a few good songs). The production is unbearably gritty and Julian's vocals are extremely bland and boring to listen to. Thank god the Regina Spektor song is only a bonus track because that is easily one of the worst songs for the 2000s.
    Best Songs: Reptilia, The End Has No End, Under Control, 12:51
    Worst Songs: I Can't Win, Automatic Stop, The Way it Is, Between Love & Hate    … Expand
  15. ChrisD
    Feb 24, 2005
    4
    I don't really like the Strokes, but I still feel they'd have some good potential if they made the songs sound more energetic, rather than flattening the drums until they sound like a machine, and always ALWAYS running the vocals through a meagre light distortion. Once everything stops sounding so muffled maybe some better songs will protrude.
  16. Adam
    Oct 22, 2003
    4
    If i ever meet Julian again, i'll let him know how he helped both create and destroy musical revolutio the period of three years.
  17. JohnA
    Nov 15, 2003
    4
    Very dissapointing. Too me, it sounds like a bunch of songs that weren't good enough for the first record. This is definitely not it.
  18. OliverP
    Jun 3, 2005
    3
    The idea is not a bad one, but the same idea is repeated over and over. On 12:51, Julian Casablancas must be the only singer I have ever heard who sounds just like another guitar. One of the most over-rated bands around.
  19. Matt
    Sep 27, 2004
    3
    The vastly over-rated "Is This It" is followed by by this vastly over-rated effort. Yet again, background music, nothing grabbing, expect to hear the likes of 12:51 or Reptilia in lifts and fast food restaurants for the next couple of years - it really is perfect for this, but not much else.
  20. MichaelK
    Oct 28, 2003
    2
    Pathetic rehash, much prefer White Stripes and (especially) Interpol to this torrid garbage. When will the singer learn singing through a megaphone IS A GODDAMN ANNOYING EFFECT???!!! If you're considering getting this garbage and you haven't heard Interpol yet, by all means buy theirs instead, Turn On the Bright Lights. Imaginative and vastly superior, and it actually mines a Pathetic rehash, much prefer White Stripes and (especially) Interpol to this torrid garbage. When will the singer learn singing through a megaphone IS A GODDAMN ANNOYING EFFECT???!!! If you're considering getting this garbage and you haven't heard Interpol yet, by all means buy theirs instead, Turn On the Bright Lights. Imaginative and vastly superior, and it actually mines a retro vein no one's touched yet.… Expand
  21. PaulF
    Dec 21, 2004
    2
    I can't believe how so many reviewers and people like the strokes. What is it about them? It's like no one has ever heard a decent rock band before! After reading Q's review i went and bought it. What a mistake thet was. Every damn song sounds the same & the lead singers voice never changes tone throughout and sounds completely dull making the album an absolute chore to I can't believe how so many reviewers and people like the strokes. What is it about them? It's like no one has ever heard a decent rock band before! After reading Q's review i went and bought it. What a mistake thet was. Every damn song sounds the same & the lead singers voice never changes tone throughout and sounds completely dull making the album an absolute chore to listen to. It's only 30mins long & i still can't bring myself to listen to it all. Absolute awful - avoid.… Expand
  22. MackB
    Dec 27, 2005
    2
    Say it ain't so. I really loved 'Is This It?' - but I certainly didn't consider them the saviors of rock 'n roll. Anyone with an ounce of music knowledge knows that their sound is decidedly NOT unique. But that was okay for their debut - it was 1 track on repeat 11 times, but that one track was extremely catchy and easy to enjoy. It wasn't challenging or Say it ain't so. I really loved 'Is This It?' - but I certainly didn't consider them the saviors of rock 'n roll. Anyone with an ounce of music knowledge knows that their sound is decidedly NOT unique. But that was okay for their debut - it was 1 track on repeat 11 times, but that one track was extremely catchy and easy to enjoy. It wasn't challenging or original, but it didn't need to be, it was just insanely enjoyable. After the initial thrill of the song(s) wore off, however, I was left with the terrible feeling that this band shouldn't record another record - because it was obvious that they were a one-trick pony. Or is it Phony? I must say, I listened to 'Is This It?' before I read about the hype, or the faux lifestyle represented by the members...and those two elements certainly helped ruin the fun for me. It might as well be me "singing" (Julian isn't really singing) these ditties about seedy, trashy NY life. That would be just as genuine. So what's wrong with 'Room on Fire'? Well, it took these faux musicians 2 years to release the SAME ALBUM. Had this been a debut, 2 years ago, then it would make a fine replacement for 'Is This It?'. As a second album, it fails to achieve even sophomore slump status. This is worse - it's a note for note, verbatim copy. And all this took 2 years plus a scrapped session with Nigel Godrich? I could have made 'Room On Fire' the day after I heard their debut. They could have made a lasting impression on pop-rock had they just stopped with one album. Just how long can they keep up the facade that they're actually musicians anyway? What's worse is that there are legions of mindless souls out there willing to gobble up this unimaginative rehash - and then say that it is the "best thing ever". The Strokes should have just toured for life from their first album - at least then the facade would still be intact.… Expand
  23. AdamX
    Oct 20, 2003
    1
    awful, really... they simply haven't gone anywhere with their sound! the songs sound like poor rehashes, and theres very little in the way of actual tunes (barring the quite good "Whatever Happened?"). Overall i'm sorely disappointed, but not overly surprised...
  24. Rick
    Jan 29, 2004
    1
    So this is what it takes bands nowadays to become legends, pretty faces, stealing almost everything(musically), and a bunch of screaming 12 year olds..These guys formed a band in Prep school, learned and played C5, D5, and F5 chords, got a drummer that sucks so much, meg white could kick his as# any day, and boom there bigger than anything...Wow , and oh yea, every thing about them is So this is what it takes bands nowadays to become legends, pretty faces, stealing almost everything(musically), and a bunch of screaming 12 year olds..These guys formed a band in Prep school, learned and played C5, D5, and F5 chords, got a drummer that sucks so much, meg white could kick his as# any day, and boom there bigger than anything...Wow , and oh yea, every thing about them is original right, lets see the guy uses enhancements on his voice, the guitars are so slow,boring and so f***ing repetitive,and the drums- i already mentioned the drum... I heard them live once and it was a joke the singer was going out of tune every 30 secounds, the drummer kept a steady boring beat, but the crowd(full of horny girls) was going crazy. The album is almost exactly the same as Is This It, its like the reanimation cd from linkin park..Rehashed s**t, songs like 12:51, under control , and between love and hate sound the same from the previous cd(but with crappier lyrics) the only song i did like was The way it is.. Maybe the guitarist and drummer and ah hell the whole band should take lessons, just to forward there playing ability, because this sounds like s**t...How many times can i listen to power chords played over enhancements voice that to be truthful sounds awful..What I?m i listening to techno… Expand
  25. ScottH
    Apr 7, 2005
    0
    The lead singer can't sing and the band plays the same song over and over again.
  26. BunifaJ
    Nov 3, 2003
    0
    What is dis crap? I can't baleve I wasted ma bling bling on dis shite right herre. Damn grrl, this CD sucks like ma mamma on a first date! snap snap. Oh yes I did!
  27. jd
    Oct 25, 2003
    0
    Any hyped-up flash in the pan.
next
Page:

Awards & Rankings

9
#9 Most Discussed Album of 2003
20
#20 Most Shared Album of 2003

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 31 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 31
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 31
  3. Negative: 1 out of 31
  1. Prefix Magazine
    Jun 6, 2013
    80
    [Casablancas] builds atmosphere out of evocative lyrics and emotional scenery, and he does it without leaning on linear narrative or songs with singular interpretations.
    Read full review
  2. Rolling Stone
    80
    In the face of hysterical expectation, the Strokes have resisted the temptation to hit the brakes, grow up and screw around with a sound that doesn't need fixing -- yet.
    Read full review
  3. Nude As The News
    90
    The album is arguably better than the group's much-heralded debut, if by "better" we just mean more sonically impressive overall.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »