Kiss: Peter Criss: Pitchfork Review
      archive : A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Cover Art Kiss
Peter Criss
[Mercury Remasters Series]
Rating: 0.0

"Writing about music is like dancing to architecture."
-paraphrase of a quote oft attributed to Elvis Costello

Whenever I see that line pop up in a review, I think the same thing: "Too fucking lazy to think of anything to say." (And how come this sentence only seems to be popping up in every 20th review I read? Either we're too high to think or that higher intelligence shit is becoming good friends with our other disappearing pal Civility. Anyhow...) What if some architects started up a radio station? Would they thereby teach us a new way of dancing, and will Peter Criss' solo album be the soundtrack?

Um, no.

Come on, did you really think so? Yeah, Ringo has "Octopus' Garden," but Criss had "Beth." Okay. That's your solo project in a nutshell. Alas, since each member of Kiss had to release a solo album, it came to be that Peter Criss had to poop one out.

I really take the bullet for you people sometimes. Fuckin' A, have you heard this thing? The song "You Matter to Me" is Peter's subliminal disco pipeline into cocaine- fueled shit songwriting, and it's one of the many songs that Criss didn't write. While he did co-write half of the songs, it took more people to yank out the carburetor and pour sugar into this solo vehicle. Michael Morgan, Sean Delaney, and John Vastano are just some of the many fantastic contributors that, thanks to this album, will be forever known to the collective masses as "Who?"

As the years go by, albums come, albums go, and once in a while they blow. And the wind cries Peter.

-Jason Josephes

10.0: Essential
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible