Metascore
60

Mixed or average reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 21
  2. Negative: 4 out of 21
  1. May 22, 2012
    30
    Replete with tacky production and recycled ideas, its few merits are stretched to near breaking point.
  2. May 21, 2012
    20
    Lyrically vapid, auto-tuned and stadium-aspiring choruses like these, with their hands-in-the-air, mugging-with-your-mates quality, are so lacking in imagination that they make "feel-good" feel really, really bad.
  3. 20
    Skimming the top, fun. gets credit for its positive attitude and pocket full of catchy melodies, but on the whole, Some Nights remains forgettable.
User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 104 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 26 out of 40
  2. Negative: 7 out of 40
  1. Feb 21, 2012
    6
    fun.'s first album was pretty much perfection and didn't get any attention. For this album, they had the good fortune of getting a single into Glee and other areas of the public sphere, which brought them recognition. However, I'm sorry to say that they disappoint a bit with this second album. They're a little less ... well, fun. They also apparently got ahold of an auto-tuner and went to town. Auto-tuning is for people who don't have good voices to sound at least bearable or interesting. Lead singer Nate Ruess doesn't have that problem, but he started using his new toy anyway, for some reason. Otherwise awesome songs are riddled with auto-tuning, sometimes to literally annoying levels, to the point that I have to skip tracks halfway through. It's weird, because I'll be loving a song, and then I'll have to end it. I'd say there are two songs of comparable quality to Aim and Ignite, then another handful that are above average compared to modern music, and then half are verging upon unlistenable. =[ Full Review »
  2. Feb 23, 2012
    3
    This album is sadly the epitome of everything wrong with both 'indie' and pop music in 2012. It's just incredible that music has reached the point where even people who can legitimately sing very well have to use autotune to remain competitive on the radio. The band here are nothing more than bland background in order to launch Nate Ruess up into the heights of implied super-stardom. He struts through the songs acting like the king of the world, projecting his voice far into every facet of the mix - choruses are often completely filled with layers and layers of vocals at different pitches, as if Some Nights is Ruess' own audition tape for American Idol. All indie credibility is utterly quashed since their promotion on Glee, which is surely the death knell for any hipster. Also of note are the ridiculously weak lyrics; the previous album's charm and intelligent story telling has been replaced with "ooh-la-la's" and the constant re-iteration of the song title. Couple that with the grating use of digital pitch-shifting and you have something more akin to Katy Perry than Fun. In closing, Some Nights is an absurd follow-up to Aim and Ignite, and appears to be the transition into what will probably be something even more easily digestible in the future. Full Review »
  3. Aug 21, 2012
    5
    This album is flawed. One Foot is incredibly repetitive, It Gets Better is plain bad and the "T-Pain effect", auto-tune, is used in all the wrong ways. However, I'm glad they found success with this album. The album balances out at a five because I love some tracks (Some Nights, We Are Young, Some Nights Intro), some a okay (Why Am I the One, All Alone, All Alright, Carry On, Stars) and some tracks are unbearable (It Gets Better, One Foot). It's not a recommended purchase, but I'm still rooting for them to rack up more hits. Full Review »