Haunted Cities - Transplants

Mixed or average reviews - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 11
  2. Negative: 1 out of 11
  1. The whole package ends up having this strangely alluring glimmer. It's like discovering California Babylon after being lost in suburbia.
  2. Cities is less songful than its predecessor, but on propulsive winners such as the flamenco-flavored "Crash and Burn," Armstrong's snaggletoothed choruses make for a soulful counterpoint to his mates' soused swagger.
  3. Haunted Cities has more of a street-smarts vibe and is actually more listenable [than their debut].
  4. It's a sometimes bleak record, but one that shows that Armstrong and his cohorts are not satisfied by taking the easy route.
  5. Transplants make a splattery mess of modern music as often as they stumble over something new and exciting.
  6. As if the macho posturing wasn't bad enough, 'Haunted Cities' is also a mess musically. [2 Jul 2005, p.64]
  7. 80
    More tuneful and less experimental than their debut. [Aug 2005, p.113]
  8. 40
    Their 2002 debut was a surprising success, but Haunted Cities struggles to repeat the trick. [Sep 2005, p.100]
  9. Think of them as a slightly above-average combo of the Clash, Fun Lovin' Criminals, and some snotty band from the burbs. [24 Jun 2005, p.164]
  10. 25
    While Transplants' self-titled debut caught the trio at that moment when the third-beer buzz kicks in... the new record seems to have picked up several pints and bong hits later, when shit starts to get grisly. [Aug 2005, p.96]
User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 16 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 12
  2. Negative: 1 out of 12
  1. j30
    Aug 15, 2011
    Expected a bit more after their awesome self-titled debut. There's still some noteworthy songs like "Not Today" and "Apocalypse Now."