Results May Vary Image
Metascore
33

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 11 Critics What's this?

User Score
4.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 207 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: The critics were not kind to this follow-up to 'Chocolate Starfish...,' which sees the band with a new guitarist (who won the slot in a competition held at various Guitar Centers!) replacing the departed Wes Borland.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 11
  2. Negative: 6 out of 11
  1. Q Magazine
    80
    A far more rounded proposition than 2000's water-treading Chocolate Starfish. [Dec 2003, p.132]
  2. With the Bizkit's usual guitar-heavy thrash still in place, songs such as "Creamer (Radio Is Dead)" and "Lonely World" get by on Linkin Park-style electronic textures, stutter-step rhythms and catchy, cathartic choruses.
  3. Entertainment Weekly
    42
    The songs without hip-hop accents or full-on rage merely seem dreary and gray or derivative of vintage alt bands. [10 Oct 2003, p.121]
  4. Since the music has no melody, hooks, or energy, all attention is focused on the clown jumping up and down and screaming in front, and long before the record is over, you're left wondering, how the hell did he ever get to put this mess out?
  5. No, Fred, the results don't vary. The results are consistent throughout your new album--consistently crappy.
  6. Eventually, 'Results May Vary' could become a fascinating document - a frightening insight into the vacuous state of 21st century culture.
  7. Alternative Press
    0
    Forgettable to anybody with a soul. [Jan 2004, p.103]

See all 11 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 112
  2. Negative: 70 out of 112
  1. C.Marsalis
    Mar 24, 2008
    10
    We came across this album by accident over the last few months. Contrary to all the bad publicity about this album, it is without doubt one We came across this album by accident over the last few months. Contrary to all the bad publicity about this album, it is without doubt one of the most important albums since 1993. The production and ideas within this album are quite unique.The last albums to contain such artistry was Songs of Distant Earth by Mike Oldfield and Talk by Yes. Its quite disgraceful on some of the voting, obviously from people who have no clue about music production. We have analysed some reviews by these individuals on other albums and its quite sad and obvious that these critics are like everything within the industry- to be aiding and abetting the demise of talent within the music industry. We suggest that those critics should become independent from the Record Companies. Its ok monopolizing CD Sales etc but to monopolise what talent is, is detrimental to the industry. Expand
  2. tokyo_goddess
    Jan 31, 2004
    10
    This cd is diffrent from their first one. It has more mellow tracks. Basically, whatever mood you are in, hard head bangin', rappish, This cd is diffrent from their first one. It has more mellow tracks. Basically, whatever mood you are in, hard head bangin', rappish, slow, sad, and a beat mood this cd won't let you down. At least 2 songs are for a diffren mood. And the lyrics aren't that bad, very catchy. I must say the only songs I'm not crazy about are 'Behind blue eyes', only cause it's a remake of a classic, and 'Red light green light', which the main rap song on the whole cd. It is a little monotonous, but whatever. And the fact they have short good music song sequences after songs, for people who hate the cd, don't even know these songs exists. It's like a treat for putting through the worst songs on the cd, coincidentally 'Behind Blue Eyes' and 'Red light green light'. But all in all, the cd is awesome. A cd I have yet to get tored of in 5 1/2 months. Expand
  3. BernieG
    Feb 15, 2009
    8
    It's not their best work. The only issues I have with it are Wes Borland not present and the fact that it was mostly ballad-heavy. It's not their best work. The only issues I have with it are Wes Borland not present and the fact that it was mostly ballad-heavy. Otherwise, it's really not a bad CD. I think the reason people shit all over it is because they hate Fred Durst. I like their first 2 CD's better. And I did like "Chocolate Starfish". But this CD does get better with each listen. To those who still have it, Check it out again. It's really a decent CD. Expand
  4. wills
    Oct 4, 2003
    1
    this CD does serve one purpose, it will make you laugh.
  5. JamieL
    Oct 3, 2003
    0
    This cd is absolutely terrble
  6. ShelR
    Jan 22, 2005
    0
    this is the worst cd i have ever heard
  7. BenS
    Nov 21, 2005
    0
    hmmmmmmmmmmmm, lets give this album some careful, consideration, listen, relisten and till, oh whats the point, FOR CHRISSAKES FRED NOONE hmmmmmmmmmmmm, lets give this album some careful, consideration, listen, relisten and till, oh whats the point, FOR CHRISSAKES FRED NOONE CARES YOU FAT OLD FRATBOY, ahhhhhhhhhhhhh Expand

See all 112 User Reviews