Mixed or average reviews - based on 8 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 8
  2. Negative: 0 out of 8
Buy On
  1. Nov 13, 2017
    Some of the bombastic stadium moments are so silly they’re fun but the more rustic pieces are where this Starr shines brightest. Speed Of Sound and Shake It Up have good-time rockabilly swagger, while the record’s highlight is So Wrong For So Long: a pedal-steel breakup tune which reaffirms Starr’s scouse-cowboy croon as one of the great lost voices of country music.
  2. Sep 14, 2017
    His umpteenth solo set is a well-timed all-star candygram.
  3. Sep 14, 2017
    Starr remains fond of late-period Beatles, goosed with a bit of arena rock volume, and since he's working with a group of well-seasoned pros, this guitar pop is all well crafted and amiable.
  4. Mojo
    Sep 5, 2017
    What stands out most about Give More Love is that Ringo's vocals have matured stylistically from his trademark amiably blokeish tones, and are stronger and more expressive now. [Oct 2017, p.90]
  5. 60
    Inevitably they’re not reinventing the wheel, yet it’s still good to hear Ringo’s non-voice (heavily treated), and his drumming skills are undiminished.
  6. 50
    There are few truly wince-inducing moments through this tidy little collection, and when they arrive, they’re blessedly brief.
  7. Uncut
    Sep 5, 2017
    McCartney straps on the bass for two tracks, adding very little to generic rockers typical of the album as a whole. [Oct 2017, p.40]
  8. Q Magazine
    Sep 5, 2017
    The forgettable radio-pop of Laughable or Show Me The Way suggests a musician with nothing to prove having fun with his friends. After five songs, though, Give More Love nosedives into by-numbers country rock. [Oct 2017, p.111]
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 12
  2. Negative: 5 out of 12
  1. Sep 24, 2017
    Usually I write track-by-track reviews for albums which describe what makes each track good or bad, but every track on this album is ****Usually I write track-by-track reviews for albums which describe what makes each track good or bad, but every track on this album is **** awful so I figured that it would be a big waste of time if you were to read a large review when I could just summarize what makes this album a piece of **** First, this album is incredibly unadventurous and generic and attempts to pass off nostalgia from the 70s (and even the 50s at one point) only to fail miserably because there is no instrumental backbone behind any of these songs. Second, Ringo Starr sings as if he doesn't give a **** and he probably doesn't give a **** he adds nothing to the album... and David Bowie sang great on his last album so Ringo Starr can't pull the **** old age card. Third, just **** the lyrics... just **** them until they realize how **** ****ty and ugly they are. At this point, I have to establish that the only thing positive about this album is the drumming on one song, because in every other song its horribly overproduced and **** repetitive and annoying... sigh... Don't listen to this album if you love listening to music, if you love the Beatles, if you love Ringo Starr, hell, even if you're a casual radio listener who just digests everything they listen to you will still find a way to hate the **** out of this album just like I have... it's not because it's Radiohead's Kid A... it's because it's Radiohead's Pablo Honey without the emotion and likability... I know I'm comparing Ringo to Radiohead but **** it, I'm trying really had to point across the message that this album isn't revolutionary... it's just ****.
    Final Score: 0/10
    Congratulations to Ringo Starr on making an album on the same quality as the Chainsmokers...
    Full Review »