Critics give Wonderful, Glorious a B-Side Breakdown of 72 (Keeper), from 9 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 50 to 80.
The verdict on Wonderful, Glorious
6 of 9 critics liked it. A mixed reception.
- Highest 80 NME, The Guardian, The Line of Best Fit and 2 more
- Lowest 50 Consequence
- Career Tied for #5 of Eels's 13 albums with a Breakdown
- By the numbers Eels's best-reviewed album here since Blinking Lights and Other Revelations (2005).
| The gist | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NME via Wikipediaby Kevin E. G. Perry | 8/10 | 80 | 2013 | “The tail end of the last decade could easily have felt like a swansong for the man called E. After putting out a greatest hits record and writing a staggeringly…” |
| The Guardian via Wikipediaby Maddy Costa | 4/5 | 80 | 2013 | “Suns shine, gifts are tied with little pink bows – and it's all delivered in a growl so jittery and aggressive that gentleness is obliterated, writes Maddy Costa” |
| The Line of Best Fitby Matthew Haddrill | 8/10 | 80 | 2013 | “A solid 10th album with the songs but also a band capable of delivering the breadth and depth of response keep the Eels vehicle moving onwards and upwards.” |
| musicOMHby Philip Matusavage | 4/5 | 80 | 2013 | “Given previous single titles such as Novocaine for the Soul, Cancer for the Cure and Souljacker part 1, it’s no surprise that Mark Everett, the force” |
| DIYby Tom Baker | 4/5 | 80 | 2013 | “E and gang’s tenth album is a return to distorted guitar-and-vocals primal garage rock.” |
| The A.V. Club via Wikipediaby Michael Gallucci | B+ | 75 | 2013 | “Eels: Wonderful, Glorious” |
| Paste via Wikipediaby Ryan Reed | 6/10 | 60 | 2013 | “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.” |
| Drowned in Sound via Wikipediaby Jon Clark | 6/10 | 60 | 2013 | “Eels don’t exactly explore new territory here, but they make sure that the landscape is interesting.” |
| Consequence via Wikipediaby Sasha Geffen | 2.5/5 | 50 | 2013 | “Fact: Mark Oliver Everett is not Tom Waits.” |
Every Sunday: the week's new albums, scored by the critics. Plus our own reviews when we post them. Free, and one click to leave.
Wonderful, Glorious in Eels's catalog
How these critics usually treat Eels
- The Guardian Kinder than usual9 points above the other critics here. Usually 4 points below on Eels's other albums (9).
- NME About usual for them9 points above the other critics here. Usually 1 point above on Eels's other albums (8).
More from Eels
← Earlier Tomorrow Morning (2010)Later → The Cautionary Tales of Mark Oliver Everett (2014)
More Indie & Alternative from around 2013
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) and averaged. A letter grade counts as the star rating it matches across thousands of reviews of the same albums, so a B+ is 75, like four stars, and a B is 65. Verdicts: Heavy Rotation is 85 and up, Keeper 70–84, Mixed Bag 55–69, Back of the Crate below 55. Approval is the share of critics who scored it 70 or higher (7/10, three and a half stars); the Breakdown shows green at 70 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.










Leave a Reply