I really shake my head at critics sometimes.
The world of instant mainstream reviews is populated with people who have superficial interest in and knowledge of the band in question and have pre-shaped their story based on circumstance rather than content.
I am most of the way through my first listen to Rock or Bust after having read a half-dozen or so reviews.
The critics are talking about "enduring" and "rock n roll treasures" and "always delivering what's expected of them," completely ignoring the fact that the new album is, by AC/DC standards, a dishwater-dull, forgettable, monotone effort.
These are the same people who missed the spitfire energy, uncompromising attitude, undeniable hooks, and pure, sweaty, cheeky rock'n'roll fun of the band's first 10 years, dismissing them as "brainless," "samey," and "by the numbers."
Right adjectives, wrong albums.
I love this band and I am sure parts of the album will eventually grow on me. But on first blush, it's the least impressive thing the Young brothers have ever done.
These writers ain't got a clue. Always delivering, my ass.
I'm off to drown my sorrows by listening to What's Next to the Moon?