Critics give Feed the Beast a B-Side Breakdown of 64 (D), from 8 reviews at outlets we track. Scores run 40 to 80.
The verdict on Feed the Beast
Critics split on this one: scores run from 40 (The Guardian) to 80 (NME and 2 others).
- Highest 80 NME, The Independent and AllMusic
- Lowest 40 The Guardian
- Career #2 of Kim Petras's 2 albums with a Breakdown
- By the numbers Kim Petras's best-reviewed album here since Clarity (2019).
| The gist | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NME via Wikipediaby Nick Levine | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | “The long-awaited debut from the German star is as fun and daring as you'd hope it to be” |
| The Independent via Wikipediaby Megan Graye | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | “Kim Petras plays with innuendo on her debut album, while Maisie Peters marches us into sad girl summer” |
| AllMusic via Wikipedia | 4/5 | 80 | 2023 | |
| The Line of Best Fit via Wikipediaby Kayleigh Watson | 7/10 | 70 | 2023 | “Feed The Beast permeates an artist wanting to be every version of themselves all at once.” |
| Slant via Wikipediaby Alexa Camp | 3/5 | 60 | 2023 | “Despite being packed with hooks, Kim Petras’s ‘Feed the Beast’ too often falls back on conventional contemporary pop.” |
| Rolling Stone via Wikipediaby Brittany Spanos | 3/5 | 60 | 2023 | “One of pop’s most interesting artists polishes her weird edges to go for radio-ready gold” |
| Pitchfork via Wikipediaby Shaad D’Souza | 4.3/10 | 43 | 2023 | |
| The Guardian via Wikipediaby Alexis Petridis | 2/5 | 40 | 2023 | “Lurching between well-worn current chart trends and 90s European pop-dance with flimsy melodies and frightful lyrics, Petras and her songwriters all miss the mark” |
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.
More from Kim Petras
More Pop from around 2023
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.





Leave a Reply