I mean, if I wanted to listen to an artist that put out the same thing over and over again, I’d listen to AC/DC, or insert generic overhyped and deified rock band here. (You’ve heard one you’ve heard them all is what I’m saying). The trouble with Linkin Park, was the sheer level of success that that first album garnered. It completely blew them up on a global scale, and so when it came time for the sophomore, the label justifiably said “Hey, look, money...more of the same please!”. We lapped it up as fans and consumers, don’t get me wrong, it was their sound; they excelled at that subtly electronic layered rap/metal crossover, but it frustrated the band to the point where, by the time “One More Light” came out all those years later, they’d gone out of their way to do the remix albums, acapella albums, experimental albums like “A Thousand Suns”, and ultimately tried their very best to show there was more to them than meets the eye, before that aforementioned 2017 pop album, and subsequentially, Chester Bennington’s suicide mere months later. There was more to the death of Chester, let that be clear, but we didn’t help his mental health, I acknowledge that.
It was a catch-22, as we needed to respect the band for sticking to their guns, and creating what THEY wanted to create, or felt they needed to, for better or for worse, but we just wanted the band we loved, to create music we could enjoy; (You can only push an envelope so far), we knew what they were capable of, and we didn’t always see eye to eye. We were part of the problem (Admittedly I can’t speak for EVERYONE). The whole situation soured, and there was a lot of guilt following Chester’s death where we realised, we could have been more open, and supportive, and maybe Chester would still be here with us now. The sad fact is, he isn’t, and we thought we’d lost one of the most important and influential bands of the 21st century as collateral...but here is the dilemma. The new divide, if you will...
2024 sees the RETURN of Linkin Park, with a completely new reshuffled line-up, after we thought we’d realistically seen the last of the nu-metal icons. With a brand-new singer at the forefront by the name of Emily Armstrong, who previously sang for DEAD SARA (As well as new drummer Colin Brittain, plus guitarist Brad Delson no longer touring with the band is notable) we find them opening a fresh can of worms and splitting more opinions than the US presidential election arguing over a jar of Marmite. I can’t believe I’m saying this but...this is “From Zero”, this is brand new Linkin Park...and these are my thoughts...
We’re off to a bad start, frankly, as we have “From Zero (Intro)”...and it’s on the verge of being at least patronising to a degree. We have this almost angelic, choir-esque vibe, as though the heavens have opened, and the band have returned, risen again to start from scratch. There’s a spoken word snippet where new vocalist Emily offhandedly says “From zero? Like, from nothing? OH WAIT YOUR FIRST...” and it’s cut off before she can say band. We know that Mike Shinoda has openly stated that XERO was the original project before the formation and finalisation of Linkin Park...and we know that he’s produced this album, he’s pushed for this album, and it’s like he’s pushing this ideology from the start to use Linkin Park’s name to sell records, instead of going back to that first name he’s not even hiding away from.
I’m feeling almost nonchalant dictatorial vibes right here. THIS is a primary gripe among many fans, who identify and associate Linkin Park with Chester on vocals, as the voice of the band...regardless of founding members, he was the unique, distinct voice, he was the generational talent at the forefront. If you’re so insistent on harking back to that Xero band name Mike, use that name, embrace that name if you are so proud of it, and release the music as Xero...not treat Linkin Park as a cash cow (See Wembley ticket prices). But the dilemma is only beginning...
First track proper, and first single, “The Emptiness Machine” is an absolute banger. I wanted to make a joke about McDonald’s ice cream but, it would be petty of me. I am actually Mclovin’ this. (That was cringe...whistle and I will strike you). It’s a genuinely fun, engaging track with a lot of hooks in its short run time. Lyrically it can be interpreted as a reference to Emily being associated with the Church Of Scientology; being born into it second generationally, blending a sort of realistic world view with a feeling of hopefulness. She has been moulded into this lifestyle and belief system from childhood and it’s about wanting to just fit in and wanting to find oneself. Metaphorically hammered home by the very societal "cog in the machine" type music video. As an interpretation, this just makes sense, never mind fitting in with twenty years' worth of Linkin Park fans. But were the follow up singles as strong?
Next, we have “Heavy Is The Crown” and we’ve got an immediate sense of burden here. Instrumentally the band have harked back to the period of “Minutes To Midnight” and “Living Things”, blending those practically recycled synth notes and overall tone. There’s an air of defiance in the lyrics, with lines like “You can’t win if your white flags out when the war begins” and it could be seen as Mike’s approach to Linkin Park in the face of life after Chester. The whole commitment to the band's continuation, and the pressure of Emily stepping into such iconic shoes...but they still manage to throw in a passive aggressive middle finger, as Emily does an equally long scream here as that of the track “Given Up”...as if to hammer home this justification of her appointment, in a “told you so” manner of fact. This again feels more patronising than vindicating under the surface and just comes across as hollow imitation on this instance.
Emily gets to utilise her clean vocals on the track “Over Each Other” and to be fair, she sings well through a wall of anguish and frustration, and it reeks of relationship breakdown, be it romantic, platonic or professional, but here is the issue. It's an angsty pop song, which there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with, it’s a fine song, but if I or anyone was living under a rock, and didn’t know Linkin Park had reformed in this new era with new presentation, you wouldn’t be like, “Oh is this Linkin Park?”. As fine as the song is, it could be PVRIS, it could be HALFLIVES, it could be insert modern female vocalist of current day rock band name here. There’s nothing WRONG with it, it’s a decent song, but there’s a generic quality to it. It also ends terribly as they include studio snippets of interaction with Mike, trying to push a feeling of connection and bonding, as he asks her to put her “screaming pants on”.
Why is this, I hear you ask? Ladies and gentlemen let me introduce to arguably the WORST Linkin Park song to ever be green lit for recording; “Casualty”. Honestly Charlie Fairhead should be on call to prepare you for theatre after listening to this. We’re booked in for a Tympanoplasty and a Stapedectomy...and a slap in the face for good measure. There’s a raw, hardcore, almost punk-inspired aesthetic here and while Emily CAN do this, Mike CAN'T...and when Mike starts trying to shout and produce aggressive vocals or seem assertive, he comes across as Clarence Claymore boxing and it’s pitiful to be honest. (That’s a nuanced reference, look it up).
Emily, credit to her here, sounds pissed off; she sounds like she’s really invested, and she's built for this...but this is wholly unnatural for Mike. While it has throwback elements to “The Hunting Party” with its raw presentation, and hardcore punk levels of vitriol, Mike doesn’t quite cut it here. He honestly doesn’t sound comfortable or confident performing in this manner, and the quality, or lack thereof shows, he personally brings this track down. I guess ironically you can now ask why is everything so heavy? Genuine question. No wait, no, I know what it is. Doing such a shit job himself will make Emily sound so considerably better! She’ll be praised! You tactical motherfucker. Honestly Mike she can do the aggressive vocals perfectly fine on her own and I applaud her for that, you don’t need to be involved in that. You stick to the rap stuff and the brand appropriation.
Speaking of, “Two Faced” absolutely oozes of “Meteora” era Linkin Park with the guitar tone and overall tonality regarding to chorus/verse transitions. This is more of a classic Linkin Park sound, and it does take you back twenty years, and truthfully you could easily see this as a collaboration that never saw the light of the day in 2003. It honestly wouldn’t be out of place on the original, it’s that close.
Tracks like “Stained” further hammer home that Pvris type vibe in presentation and we have to admit that Emily does bring a brand-new dynamic to the band's aura when she’s more subdued vocally, before “Good Things Go” somewhat ironically wraps up the album. There’s an almost apologetic essence here, as though the band are anticipating the reception of this new era; pre-emptive damage control if you will. It’s almost in direct acknowledgment of Mike’s decision to continue Linkin Park from a lyrical standpoint, with Emily very much being a factor in that. It’s the musical equivalent of puppy dog eyes and fishing for sympathy when you read into it, and as pleasant as the song is, aesthetically...lyrically there’s a disingenuous feeling to it and it can’t be ignored.
Ultimately, the question is, what can we take from, “From Zero”? The unbiased answer is a pletheora of things (See what I did there?). For anyone who was there from those early days in the 2000’s, that grew up with Linkin Park, when Linkin Park moulded the fabric of the person you were to become, it’s a band that holds a special place in your heart. I’d swear in a court of law, that Linkin Park helped shape the person I am now...fuck I was in Cornwall on holiday when I purchased “Hybrid Theory” and listed to it on repeat on my Buffy The Vampire Slayer skateboard with my Sony CD Walkman. It’s THAT ingrained.
As we’ve grown older as fans, we appreciate those years because they were pivotal in our upbringing...I had no peers, I had no alternative community...I had nobody trading mix tapes or cassettes or burnt CD's...but I knew this band was special. As we age, our tastes change, our worldview changes, our political mindset changes; we evolve, as individuals as well as professionals. It’s so easy to see why on a business perspective why Mike would want to bring back Linkin Park...but where do we stand when it comes to morality? On face value, this is not a bad record in the slightest, it’s got some nostalgic moments, and it takes you back to the good old days momentarily in places...but is it Linkin Park? For me, the answer is no.
Call me cynical, but they’ve tried to blatantly rehash elements from previous albums to sell a new narrative, they’ve made passive aggressive comments in spoken word segments as well as lyrics, Mike is trying to push for this, and as honestly decent as this album is on face value, which it is, it’s a fine album, I’m sorry, it’ll never be Linkin Park. QUEEN tried it with ADAM LAMBERT, can you imagine TYPE-O-NEGATIVE continuing without PETE STEELE? Can you imagine HIM without VILLE VALO? Or KORN without JONATHAN DAVIS? There's an IDENTITY...do you see my point? Any long serving band can emulate and recreate their sound instrumentally, but, you can seldom replace a voice, and the emotion that comes with it. The stories and feelings they share. We can agree to disagree, I’m fine with that, you have a right to an opinion such as I do...but to me, this is a reshuffled band recycling ideas in places to live off a rhetoric, and I’m not even mad, I’m disappointed...[6]