Rating:
5.4
Deiphago - Filipino Antichrist
31 October 2009


01. Intro: Annihilation
02. Christ Eater
03. Articles Of Death
04. Storming Chaos
05. Command Destruct
06. Subliminal Satan
07. Satanic Metal
08. Hate [Sarcofago cover]
09. Satan, Semen And Blood
10. Filipino Antichrist
11. Outro


Costa Rican Black metal baby...! Wait, what? Yeah, Deiphago resides on Costa Rica, after a couple of years of chillin' in the Philippines. Apparently they started their unholy rituals in '89, which is a bit hard to believe in my opinion, but well, who am I to dispute that? So, after precisely twenty years we can finally hear their second full-length, Filipino Antichrist. Rejoice.

Deiphago plays their Black metal the Blasphemy way. In other words, you're in for a short burst of violent chaos. Well, if they would be anywhere near Blasphemy in terms of quality... Filipino Antichrist is as scary as your dad riding around in a go-kart while wearing a tinfoil hat.

So what's my beef with this particular album, while I praise albums like Diapsiquir's VIRUS STN sky-high? Well, let's go through this one step at a time. First up are the vocals, which are mechanically distorted punkish howls. They're not too bad actually, although they're very standard they're at least not annoying like the guitars. There's hardly anything you can call a 'riff' on FA, all the guitars do is creating a bunch of noise and occasionally some weak and lame dissonance. The drummer needs to lay off the meth, and the bassist? Well, I guess he went out to take a piss during the recording session, I don't know.

Filipino Antichrist is like watching three different horror movies at the same time. The cacophony is perhaps impressive, but when your focus is scattered none of the movies really grabs your attention and sucks you in. I'm all up for a bit of noisy 'black fukken hatred' every once in a while, but if I can't stop imagining three World of Warcraft nerds playing in their mom's basement, you're doing something wrong.

Performance: 6
Songwriting: 4
Originality: 5
Production: 5


Band profile: Deiphago
Album: Filipino Antichrist


 



Written on 29.11.2009 by
Lucas
If you're interested in extreme, often emotional and underground music, check out my reviews. I retired from reviewing, but I really used to be into that stuff.
More reviews by Lucas ››



Comments

‹‹ Back to the Reviews
Comments: 11  
Users visited: 78  
Search this topic:  


Ragana - 29.11.2009 at 21:33  

Hahaha, this made me laugh. I'm not sure I'd give this album a chance in the first place, it looks too exotic for me and I'm pretty sceptical about metal what comes from places like that. However, the review is great even though the album apparently is not (I for sure would like to know what's good on it since the rating still is optimal).

How come I always end up with reading one of your reviews? And why the artworks of the albums you review are always so... attractive?
Lucas - 29.11.2009 at 21:37  
Written by Ragana on 29.11.2009 at 21:33

(I'd sure would like to know what's good on it since the rating still is optimal).


Thanks for the comment.

But, what do you mean with 'optimal'? A 5.4 is, in my country/culture, the 'highest insufficient' you can get. A 5.5 and above means you passed (usually). The album is boring, uninteresting and more, but the musicians aren't bad, there are some good riffs etc. Hope that explains it a bit.

Quote:
How come I always end up with reading one of your reviews?


No idea.

Quote:
And why the artworks of the albums you review are always so... attractive?


Hahaha, this has really been true the last months. I don't know, actually. But I've heard this before and most of the albums indeed have really cool artwork, or in this case, something that grabs your attention. Colour schemes, I guess.
Ragana - 29.11.2009 at 21:55  
Quote:
But, what do you mean with 'optimal'? A 5.4 is, in my country/culture, the 'highest insufficient' you can get. A 5.5 and above means you passed (usually). The album is boring, uninteresting and more, but the musicians aren't bad, there are some good riffs etc. Hope that explains it a bit.

Well, if we remember that 5 is half of 10 and if 10 is the highest, as we all know, then 5 doesn't seem so bad at all. However, now I can see why it's low for you. The rating systems in our countries are different. Here the highest insufficient is 3, surprisingly low comparing to your 5.4. And 4 is sufficient although it still counts as a bad mark.

However, now I understand why the rating is 5.4, thank you.

Quote:
Hahaha, this has really been true the last months. I don't know, actually. But I've heard this before and most of the albums indeed have really cool artwork, or in this case, something that grabs your attention. Colour schemes, I guess.

Then, I guess, you have a good taste in album artworks or art in general.
Lucas - 29.11.2009 at 21:59  
Quote:
Written by Ragana on 29.11.2009 at 21:55

Quote:
But, what do you mean with 'optimal'? A 5.4 is, in my country/culture, the 'highest insufficient' you can get. A 5.5 and above means you passed (usually). The album is boring, uninteresting and more, but the musicians aren't bad, there are some good riffs etc. Hope that explains it a bit.

Well, if we remember that 5 is half of 10 and if 10 is the highest, as we all know, then 5 doesn't seem so bad at all. However, now I can see why it's low for you. The rating systems in our countries are different. Here the highest insufficient is 3, surprisingly low comparing to your 5.4. And 4 is sufficient although it still counts as a bad mark.

However, now I understand why the rating is 5.4, thank you.


Yeah, that's actually often a problem, that people attribute different 'quality' to different numbers. In this case, your 3 would match my 5.4, but it gets even more confusing when you ask the question 'what would I want to listen to?'. I rarely listening to anything below 8.5, because well, I don't have infinite hours in the day and I have to decide on what album to spend my time. That's why the words are always more important.

Quote:
Hahaha, this has really been true the last months. I don't know, actually. But I've heard this before and most of the albums indeed have really cool artwork, or in this case, something that grabs your attention. Colour schemes, I guess.

Then, I guess, you have a good taste in album artworks or art in general.


Nah, I don't have good taste. Most of the albums are sent to me, I don't choose them.
Ragana - 29.11.2009 at 22:16  
Sounds pretty awful, but you definitely know how to plan your time what is a veeeery good thing. Sad is that you don't have enough time to listen to what you'd like to whilst some of us *whistles* don't even know what to listen to because everything seems so:
a) boring
b) uninteresting
c) unwanted?.

Quote:
Nah, I don't have good taste. Most of the albums are sent to me, I don't choose them.

Aww, it's sad to hear that. Well then someone's definitely got a good taste. XD
Lucas - 29.11.2009 at 22:20  
Written by Ragana on 29.11.2009 at 22:16

Sounds pretty awful, but you definitely know how to plan your time what is a veeeery good thing. Sad is that you don't have enough time to listen to what you'd like to whilst some of us *whistles* don't even know what to listen to because everything seems so:
a) boring
b) uninteresting
c) unwanted?


With 600+ CD's there's got to be something appealing for every moment of the day. It's harder to choose what NOT to listen to then what to listen to. But most of the time I listen to the music I need to review, I rarely listen to my 'own' albums. Usually only at night.
Ragana - 29.11.2009 at 22:42  
Ah, for me it's vice versa. But I surely wouldn't want to be in your place when I HAVE to listen to something to write a review. Writing a review (to be more precise - writing bad jokes on it) sounds good, though. And currently you're at your best, so you're doing a very good job even though there's no time to for other albums you'd like to listen to and you have to listen to something what's even below 5.5 (!). Waste of time, actually.

You can look at the albums and *feel* the music through the artworks. That's an idea.
ponderer - 30.11.2009 at 00:32  
Those are the kinds of scores that'll keep me from snagging this offering. Also @ Ragana, you can't use I'd and then WOULD right after each other. You are basically saying, "I would would". Sorry, it's my job.
Ragana - 30.11.2009 at 00:46  

You're right. I have no idea why I said like that or why I didn't edit that sentence. Anyway, thanks a lot for showing me my own mistakes.
Raiden - 30.11.2009 at 01:18  
Yeah well a 7 is "good", a 6 "average" so this release would be "below average"

I did notice the cover artwork too! I was thinking that one could be deceived by the good artwork and decent logo if one saw this album in a shop.
Ragana - 30.11.2009 at 01:32  
Aye, it's good that now we know the album is not good. We wouldn't be deceived by it's looks if we ever saw it, hehe.

I didn't meant it's rated as 'good', I was just saying it's not a bad rating for an album which, um, sucks pretty much.
Here a 6 is 'almost good' and only a 5 is 'average'. Damn, we really do have a bad rating system that allows dumb children to graduate the school.

Advertise on Metal Storm


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Reviews Brown Jenkins - Death Obsession 3 13.12.2009 by Bas
Reviews Disfigured Dead - Visions Of Death 3 25.02.2010 by Troy Killjoy
Reviews Velvet Cacoon - Genevieve 3 13.06.2010 by !J.O.O.E.!
Reviews Mourning Dawn - For The Fallen... 3 20.10.2009 by Marcel Hubregtse
Reviews Luctus - Jauciant Pabaiga Arti 3 07.09.2009 by Doc Godin



Hits total: 3691 | This month: 32