The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett

Eels – The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett: B-Side Breakdown 62 (D-) from 9 critic reviews.

Album cover for The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett by Eels
Released April 17, 2014
Shop on AmazonAs an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Eels

The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett

62
B-Side BreakdownGrade D- · 9 critics · 11% approval
B-Side Breakdown62Grade: D-
Approval11%1 of 9 critics scored it 75 or higher
DivisivenessSome debateHow close the scores are: most critics land within 26 points of each other

Critics give The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett a B-Side Breakdown of 62 (D-), from 9 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 40 to 89.

The verdict on The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett

Most critics weren't won over: 1 of 9 liked it.

020406080100The Guardian: 40Slant: 50Under the Radar: 55PopMatters: 60The Independent: 60Consequence: 68NME: 70AllMusic: 70Paste: 89 Breakdown 62
The gist
Paste via Wikipediaby Holly Gleason 8.9/10 89 2014 “Paste Magazine is your source for the best music, movies, TV, comedy, videogames, books, comics, craft beer, politics and more. Discover your favorite albums and films.”
NME via Wikipediaby Rhian Daly 7/10 70 2014 “E’s got some front. The last time I caught Eels live they were playing Fleetwood Mac’s ‘Oh Well’ at V Festival dressed as homeless hippies, and now he expects people…”
AllMusic via Wikipediaby Steve Leggett 3.5/5 70
Consequence via Wikipediaby Lior Phillips D+ 68 2014 “Stuck on the edges of an unending spiral of (f)eels.”
PopMatters via Wikipediaby Robin Smith 6/10 60 2014 “The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett starts with an overture, because of course it does. If there’s one fascinating development in the later-year”
The Independent via Wikipediaby Andy Gill 3/5 60 2014
Under the Radar via Wikipediaby Billy Hamilton 5.5/10 55 2014 “Eels' Mark Everett has never been known for his optimism. Even in its sunniest moments, his music is always cut with an element of spiraling introversion.”
Slant via Wikipediaby Joe Sweeney 2.5/5 50 2014 “The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett is a roughshod batch of breakup songs too fragile to support the conceptual weight of its title.”
The Guardian via Wikipediaby Tim Jonze 2/5 40 2014 “Mark Everett's got a broken heart again – and he's venturing nowhere new with this regretful collection”

The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett in Eels's catalog

75Beautiful Freak (1996): 80Electro-Shock Blues (1998): 81Daisies of the Galaxy (1999): 76Souljacker (2001): 65Shootenanny! (2003): 64Blinking Lights and Other Revelations (2005): 81Hombre Lobo (2009): 72End Times (2010): 66Tomorrow Morning (2010): 66Wonderful, Glorious (2013): 73The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett (2014): 6262This oneThe Deconstruction (2018): 55Extreme Witchcraft (2022): 6719962022
Eels's albums by B-Side Breakdown, in release order. Above the dashed line, most critics liked it. Every Eels album, ranked

How these critics usually treat Eels

  • The Guardian Harsher than usual25 points below the other critics here. Usually 2 points below on Eels's other albums (9).
  • NME Kinder than usual9 points above the other critics here. Usually level with the others on Eels's other albums (8).
  • Slant About usual for them14 points below the other critics here. Usually 21 points below on Eels's other albums (3).
  • AllMusic About usual for them9 points above the other critics here. Usually 4 points above on Eels's other albums (9).

More from Eels

See all Eels albums ranked

More Indie & Alternative from around 2014

Would you spin it again?

Be the first to answer. Results show once 3 listeners weigh in.

How the Breakdown works

Every outlet’s score is converted to 0–100 (2/5 is 40, 5.9/10 is 59, a B+ is 88) and averaged. Grades follow the B-Side scale: A is 90–100, B 80–89, C 70–79, D 60–69, F below 60. Approval is the share of critics who scored it 75 or higher; the Breakdown shows green at 75 and up, red below. Divisiveness asks a different question: not how many critics liked it, but how close their scores are to each other. Five critics who all give it 50 are Unanimous, even though none of them liked it. The labels run Unanimous, Broad agreement, Some debate, Divided, and Contentious. Replay rate comes from listeners, not critics: yes counts fully, a few tracks counts half, no counts zero. The gist quotes each outlet’s own summary of its review. Published is the date on the review itself, read from the outlet’s page, so you can see whether an album’s reputation came at release or years later. Scores marked est. come from reviews that publish no number. Scores marked via Wikipedia are archive ratings, mostly for older albums, taken from the “Professional ratings” box on the album’s Wikipedia page (published openly through Wikidata); each links to the original review when we can find it online, and to that Wikipedia entry when we can’t. When an outlet reviewed an album twice, years apart (often for a reissue), both scores count, each labeled with its year.

A-Side marks the critics’ top tier. An album earns it automatically, from its numbers alone: a Breakdown of 90 or higher, from at least 5 reviews, with at least 75% approval. Nobody hands it out and nobody can buy it; if new reviews pull an album below the line, it loses the badge.

Report a problem

Tags:

Leave a Reply