Lungs

Florence + the Machine – Lungs: B-Side Breakdown 78 (Keeper) from 9 critic reviews.

Album cover for Lungs by Florence + the Machine
Released June 13, 2009
Shop on AmazonAs an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Florence + the Machine

Lungs

78
B-Side BreakdownKeeper · 9 critics · 89% approval
B-Side Breakdown78Keeper
Approval89%8 of 9 critics scored it 70 or higher
DivisivenessBroad agreementHow close the scores are: most critics land within 18 points of each other

Critics give Lungs a B-Side Breakdown of 78 (Keeper), from 9 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 60 to 90.

The verdict on Lungs

8 of 9 critics liked it, and they mostly agree.

020406080100NME: 60Rolling Stone: 70Pitchfork: 72Spin: 80Q: 80The Guardian: 80Entertainment Weekly: 85The A.V. Club: 85AllMusic: 90 Breakdown 78
The gist
AllMusic via Wikipediaby James Christopher Monger 4.5/5 90
Entertainment Weekly via Wikipediaby Joseph Brannigan Lynch A- 85 2009
The A.V. Club via Wikipediaby Genevieve Koski A- 85 2009 “Florence + The Machine: Lungs”
Spin via Wikipediaby Melissa Maerz 4/5 80 2009 “Calling all crazy ex-girlfriends: If you're gonna keep up with Florence Welch, you might need stronger meds. In the U.K., where Lungs has become 2009's”
Q via Wikipedia 4/5 80 2009
The Guardian via Wikipediaby Dave Simpson 4/5 80 2009 “Freed from her irritating live persona, moments here justify the hype, writes Dave Simpson”
Pitchfork via Wikipediaby Ryan Dombal 7.2/10 72 2009 “Unlike fellow quirky UK songstresses La Roux and Little Boots, Florence Welch moves away from the Lily/Amy template by building her career from the bottom up.”
Rolling Stone via Wikipediaby Jon Dolan 3.5/5 70 2009 “Check out our album review of Artist's Lungs on Rolling Stone.com.”
NME via Wikipediaby Jamie Fullerton 6/10 60 2009 “Pretty much every molecule of Florence And The Machine divides opinion, scoring a line of taste like a Stanley knife through a forearm. Live, Florence ‘Flossie’ Welch dresses up as…”

Lungs in Florence + the Machine's catalog

70Lungs (2009): 7878This oneCeremonials (2011): 7676How Big, How Blue, How Beautiful (2015): 7676High as Hope (2018): 7272Dance Fever (2022): 8282Everybody Scream (2025): 81812025
Florence + the Machine's albums by B-Side Breakdown, in release order. Above the dashed line, most critics liked it. Every Florence + the Machine album, ranked

How these critics usually treat Florence + the Machine

  • NME Harsher than usual20 points below the other critics here. Usually 3 points above on Florence + the Machine's other albums (5).
  • AllMusic Kinder than usual14 points above the other critics here. Usually 1 point below on Florence + the Machine's other albums (5).
  • The Guardian Kinder than usual2 points above the other critics here. Usually 12 points below on Florence + the Machine's other albums (4).
  • Rolling Stone About usual for them9 points below the other critics here. Usually 4 points below on Florence + the Machine's other albums (5).
  • Pitchfork About usual for them7 points below the other critics here. Usually 12 points below on Florence + the Machine's other albums (5).

More from Florence + the Machine

See all Florence + the Machine albums ranked

More Indie & Alternative from around 2009

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.

Report a problem


Discover more from B-Side Guys

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Tags:

Leave a Reply