A decade ago, The Strokes saved Rock and Roll from the clutches of an unknown evil and have been on a steady downward spiral ever since. While I wasn't blown away by Is This It like NME or the rest of the universe was, I knew it had some notable tunes and was a fun record.
Two years later, The Strokes remixed and released the same album and called it Room on Fire. OK, that's not strictly true but the album, while praised at the time, lacked the same ambition as it's predecessor and showed no evolution between records. It didn't have as many tunes and a bit too much filler but the band were still in it's early days and many hoped for some real progression with the inevitable third album.
Three years later, First Impressions of Earth reared it's confused head, got an unjustified number one slot in the UK charts and was a record that, like Room on Fire, had a few notable excellent tracks (the first three) but far too much filler and went on for what seemed like a dog's age.
After this and touring non-stop for what seemed like an eternity (but what was actually just over five years), the band went on a fashionable hiatus and went on to pursue different projects. Then after much arguing and new creative directions, the band became whole again and here were are, a decade after Is This It with album number four; Angles.
Does it return the band to the wonder years of garage rock or have they continued the strange and bendy road of influences in prog rock?
Neither, they've embraced synthpop.
Like The King of Limbs, Angles has a lot in common with Jullian Casablancas' solo album Phrazes of the Young with it's synths and song structures. Of course it still retains the key elements of The Strokes (far more so than Radiohead's latest album) but the drive and ambition seems to have evaporated into something that has been released for the sake of being released.
The problem with the record is it lacks cohesion. The band revealed that their previous writing process was thrown out the window for Angles and it shows (and not in a good way). Casablancas lyrics sound like an after thought and the music sounds far too generic throughout. It's difficult to differentiate tracks like Games and You're So Right because they aren't memorable and once you've heard one of the tracks, you can rest assure you've heard them all.
Like it's predecessors, there's a few hints of something greater trying to emerge from the filler. Under Cover of Darkness is the best example of the band evolving but retaining the same spirit as their former selves.
Two Kinds of Happiness emerges immediately after; the music is rocky, the vocals are strangely quiet but then transform into a jumbled but strangely satisfying mess for the chorus and it's entertaining throughout.
The album really gets together by the end with Gratisfaction; a Thin Lizzy soundalike which shows the bands playful side (which takes far too long on a record which doesn't take itself too seriously).
Metabolism, like Under Cover of Darkness, shows us again the band can change and sound good doing it (with special credit to Casablancas for some truly great vocals). The album reaches a close with Life is Simple in the Moonlight, with bizarrely depressing lyrics and a lot more in common with songs off of First Impressions of Earth. It's a great closing track that really sticks out on the album.
But minus these little moments of fun; Angles is a thankfully short and generic album nowhere near waiting for five years. It's a strange (though heavily hinted) direction for a band that want to change but have no idea how to, but with a fanbase who simply want the glory days of the band who made being in a rock band fun reignited.
Only time will tell if The Strokes will go beyond the strange year of 2001 when their simplistic but memorable debut was the soundtrack of the indie kid. I just hope we don't have to wait another five years for something this disjointed and disappointing again.
5/10
Saturday 26 March 2011
Monday 21 March 2011
Radiohead - The King of Limbs Review
2011 is the year of the entity. Oh sure, you could say that like every other year there might be one record that stands head and shoulders above the rest, chest pushed out, standing tall like a god whilst it’s contemporary counter-parts cower behind the mountains of shit, hoping for a breakthrough or crack to appear that they can fill the void.
I say this as the aptly titled The King of Limbs, the long awaited release from alternative band Radiohead finally saw release two weeks ago to the screams and adulation of its increasingly devoted/demented fanbase. As always (well, since Kid A), no one had any idea what to expect other than perhaps the greatest thing released ever.
So, now that time had past and we can get past the confetti and deafening screams, what does The King of Limbs bring to the table?
Minimalism, no structure and the least accessible album since Kid A.
So yeah, what was hinted as a heavily acoustic-piano based record with around twenty known songs in the pipeline has evolved into eight (count ‘em, eight) tracks, running just over half an hour and with no real instruments prevalent.
It’s a strange scenario as The King of Limbs has more in common with Thom Yorke’s solo debut than any Radiohead album before it. Opening track Bloom, a scattery, non-structure relative to OK Computer's Airbag begins our strange journey through the proverbial woods. It’s a decent opener, if a bit too long.
From there, the songs get gradually easier on the ears. Morning Mr. Magpie; an Amnesiac left-over which began as a Beatles-esque acoustic pop song has morphed into a nervous, jittery wreck. Little by Little, one of the only radio-friendly songs on the record brings themes raised in Jigsaw Falling into Place from In Rainbows with Yorke’s strangely playful voice telling a lover how they work well together.
The album gets to the halfway point with Feral which in an album of relations, is a much more pleasant descendent of The Gloaming. Although there are vocals, they’re incomprehensible and utilise Yorke’s previous comments on using his voice as an instrument.
Finally, five songs in, we reach Lotus Flower, the first song with a common structure of verse, pre-chorus and chorus and it’s hear the record finally becomes to the same standard of Radiohead we’ve come to know and love.
In the theme of keeping things similar but different, we come to Codex (or Pyramid Song part two). It’s a slow, sombre piano song with the occasional French horn. Give Up the Ghost, a live favourite finally makes its studio appearance, Another slow but sombre song with Yorke’s voice sampled throughout.
The album quickly reaches a close at Separator (or formally known as Mouse Dog Bird). The song starts off slowly but picks up around the middle with lyrics hinting at a continuation (or what isn’t clear at this stage but optimists are hoping for new tracks).
So, upon first listening, The King of Limbs isn’t anything particularly special. It sounds intentionally difficult to listen to and even after an eleven year gap, Radiohead have somehow made Kid A easier on the ears.
If however you’re like me, you’ll give it a second listen immediately and from here, the record sounds different and far more pleasant. It’s a strange experience as the album isn’t droning enough to be classified as drone music but the ambience and brief breaks beyond the repetitive beats and difficult structures are far more noticeable. Eventually after multiple listens it becomes easier on the ears and can be looked in a favourable light.
The biggest problem with The King of Limbs is it doesn’t feel like a band effort. There’s nothing here that suggests the band is working as a cohesive unit and anything here could have just as easily been used as a follow up to Yorke’s solo effort The Eraser.
Another is anyone who’s listened to electronica recently will see similarities between songs on the record and the sound of other artists. Lotus Flower, one of the best songs on the record is an amalgamation of anything Four Tet have released and Feral sounds like a proverbial cover of The Gloaming by Burial.
It’s not the first time Radiohead have done this and to be honest, all music is basically inspired from one another but I can’t help but think, if this wasn’t a Radiohead album, it wouldn’t have received the same adulation and praise and simply would have been left in the dust.
So where does this leave The King of Limbs? Is it the best Radiohead album? Not by a long shot (that accolade will probably remain with OK Computer forever). Is it the best album they’ve released using a laptop? Only time will tell.
Is it good? No, it’s very good but it lacks the organics of In Rainbows or the revolution of Kid A and after a four year wait, it’s only just worth waiting for.
8/10
I say this as the aptly titled The King of Limbs, the long awaited release from alternative band Radiohead finally saw release two weeks ago to the screams and adulation of its increasingly devoted/demented fanbase. As always (well, since Kid A), no one had any idea what to expect other than perhaps the greatest thing released ever.
So, now that time had past and we can get past the confetti and deafening screams, what does The King of Limbs bring to the table?
Minimalism, no structure and the least accessible album since Kid A.
So yeah, what was hinted as a heavily acoustic-piano based record with around twenty known songs in the pipeline has evolved into eight (count ‘em, eight) tracks, running just over half an hour and with no real instruments prevalent.
It’s a strange scenario as The King of Limbs has more in common with Thom Yorke’s solo debut than any Radiohead album before it. Opening track Bloom, a scattery, non-structure relative to OK Computer's Airbag begins our strange journey through the proverbial woods. It’s a decent opener, if a bit too long.
From there, the songs get gradually easier on the ears. Morning Mr. Magpie; an Amnesiac left-over which began as a Beatles-esque acoustic pop song has morphed into a nervous, jittery wreck. Little by Little, one of the only radio-friendly songs on the record brings themes raised in Jigsaw Falling into Place from In Rainbows with Yorke’s strangely playful voice telling a lover how they work well together.
The album gets to the halfway point with Feral which in an album of relations, is a much more pleasant descendent of The Gloaming. Although there are vocals, they’re incomprehensible and utilise Yorke’s previous comments on using his voice as an instrument.
Finally, five songs in, we reach Lotus Flower, the first song with a common structure of verse, pre-chorus and chorus and it’s hear the record finally becomes to the same standard of Radiohead we’ve come to know and love.
In the theme of keeping things similar but different, we come to Codex (or Pyramid Song part two). It’s a slow, sombre piano song with the occasional French horn. Give Up the Ghost, a live favourite finally makes its studio appearance, Another slow but sombre song with Yorke’s voice sampled throughout.
The album quickly reaches a close at Separator (or formally known as Mouse Dog Bird). The song starts off slowly but picks up around the middle with lyrics hinting at a continuation (or what isn’t clear at this stage but optimists are hoping for new tracks).
So, upon first listening, The King of Limbs isn’t anything particularly special. It sounds intentionally difficult to listen to and even after an eleven year gap, Radiohead have somehow made Kid A easier on the ears.
If however you’re like me, you’ll give it a second listen immediately and from here, the record sounds different and far more pleasant. It’s a strange experience as the album isn’t droning enough to be classified as drone music but the ambience and brief breaks beyond the repetitive beats and difficult structures are far more noticeable. Eventually after multiple listens it becomes easier on the ears and can be looked in a favourable light.
The biggest problem with The King of Limbs is it doesn’t feel like a band effort. There’s nothing here that suggests the band is working as a cohesive unit and anything here could have just as easily been used as a follow up to Yorke’s solo effort The Eraser.
Another is anyone who’s listened to electronica recently will see similarities between songs on the record and the sound of other artists. Lotus Flower, one of the best songs on the record is an amalgamation of anything Four Tet have released and Feral sounds like a proverbial cover of The Gloaming by Burial.
It’s not the first time Radiohead have done this and to be honest, all music is basically inspired from one another but I can’t help but think, if this wasn’t a Radiohead album, it wouldn’t have received the same adulation and praise and simply would have been left in the dust.
So where does this leave The King of Limbs? Is it the best Radiohead album? Not by a long shot (that accolade will probably remain with OK Computer forever). Is it the best album they’ve released using a laptop? Only time will tell.
Is it good? No, it’s very good but it lacks the organics of In Rainbows or the revolution of Kid A and after a four year wait, it’s only just worth waiting for.
8/10
Monday 7 March 2011
The Social Network Review
Imagine a world without Facebook. It’s a premise that has set the standard for just about every review for The Social Network but it does create an interesting proposition.
The site, now in it’s eighth year of life has spawned a new medium of social interaction, a new ground to debate upon and has no doubt, brought you closer to people who you would have probably said farewell to at the end of High School.
But how did it all begin I hear you ask? This is where David Fincher's tale of betrayal, arrogance and hacking drinking games comes in with The Social Network. Based on the book The Accidental Billionaires, the film shows us how Facebook came to be and how you may never want to hear the term poking again.
The film’s framing device plays between two court cases. The accused is Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg; a borderline stereotype of Aspergers Syndrome who speaks a million words a minute and only finds consultation when using source coding.
In one case is Mark’s apparent best friend Eduardo played by future Spider-Man Andrew Garfield. Eduardo is by far the most likeable character in the entire film (which might come down to him being the only person to give information regarding the outcome of the suits) but doesn’t have any real negative traits.
The other case has our other two main characters, twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss played by Armie Hammer (yep, the same actor). The two are behemoths who enjoy rowing and are far too used to having things go their way. Unlike stereotypical twins who are basically the same person, the twins have different opinions but a common goal of acknowledgement, one that Zuckerberg can provide them with but ultimately, doesn’t.
To set-up the story, in a nutshell; Zuckerberg is dumped by his girlfriend and crashes the Harvard servers by creating a website that asks which campus students are better looking than their peers. The twins, impressed by Zuckerberg’s skills, enlist him of their venture to create a Harvard only site for connecting students called Harvard Connect.
From here, the film takes many twists and turns as theFacebook (as it’s then known) takes off and quickly becomes an online phenomenon that turns co-workers into advisories and friends into enemies (as demonstrated by the quick cuts to the court scenes which shows how damaged the relationship between the characters is).
So yeah, a rip roaring tale about the joys of hacking, website building and dialogue so fast, you’ll wonder if the editors accidentally had the entire film on fast forward. It’s not exactly your stereotypical summer blockbuster and the only special effects seem to be making the computers look like actual computers running regular software.
But beneath the premise which only a small handful of people would be interested in a
character drama more in the mould of Wall Street than computer hacker films like…well, Hackers.
It’s a film built purely on exchanges. You can guess the outcome because Facebook is
still going strong and Zuckerberg occasionally shows his real life persona. What we do get however is a growing trend escalation. As the film continues from the first, brilliant ten minutes, the website grows quickly, finding our characters desperately trying to adapt to the changes that are spiralling out of control.
All goes well to begin with but when Napster founder Sean Parker, played ironicallyby Justin Timberlake enters the fray, everything falls apart and yet, gets better. By the end, we’re left with a film where two wronged but undeserving brutes are awarded compensation, the only likable character is rewarded for fighting back (literally) and Zuckerberg is left as the world’s youngest billionaire with no friends and only his laptop to keep him company.
It’s a strange but memorable film built on the foundations of interaction. While cinematography is minimal (dorms look like dorms and company offices look sleek and sexy), the soundtrack by NIN frontman Trent Reznor is another classic in a year where soundtracks reign supreme. Fans of NIN collection Ghosts I-IV will enjoy the slightly newer versions of older songs whilst the rest of us can enjoy a nice soundtrack of sampled rock and electronic beats.
When all is said and done, The Social Network is a strange but engrossing tale of greed and betrayal with fantastic acting and an engrossing plot. For anyone’s who’s been poked or wanted a reason not to, this one’s for you.
8/10
The site, now in it’s eighth year of life has spawned a new medium of social interaction, a new ground to debate upon and has no doubt, brought you closer to people who you would have probably said farewell to at the end of High School.
But how did it all begin I hear you ask? This is where David Fincher's tale of betrayal, arrogance and hacking drinking games comes in with The Social Network. Based on the book The Accidental Billionaires, the film shows us how Facebook came to be and how you may never want to hear the term poking again.
The film’s framing device plays between two court cases. The accused is Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg; a borderline stereotype of Aspergers Syndrome who speaks a million words a minute and only finds consultation when using source coding.
In one case is Mark’s apparent best friend Eduardo played by future Spider-Man Andrew Garfield. Eduardo is by far the most likeable character in the entire film (which might come down to him being the only person to give information regarding the outcome of the suits) but doesn’t have any real negative traits.
The other case has our other two main characters, twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss played by Armie Hammer (yep, the same actor). The two are behemoths who enjoy rowing and are far too used to having things go their way. Unlike stereotypical twins who are basically the same person, the twins have different opinions but a common goal of acknowledgement, one that Zuckerberg can provide them with but ultimately, doesn’t.
To set-up the story, in a nutshell; Zuckerberg is dumped by his girlfriend and crashes the Harvard servers by creating a website that asks which campus students are better looking than their peers. The twins, impressed by Zuckerberg’s skills, enlist him of their venture to create a Harvard only site for connecting students called Harvard Connect.
From here, the film takes many twists and turns as theFacebook (as it’s then known) takes off and quickly becomes an online phenomenon that turns co-workers into advisories and friends into enemies (as demonstrated by the quick cuts to the court scenes which shows how damaged the relationship between the characters is).
So yeah, a rip roaring tale about the joys of hacking, website building and dialogue so fast, you’ll wonder if the editors accidentally had the entire film on fast forward. It’s not exactly your stereotypical summer blockbuster and the only special effects seem to be making the computers look like actual computers running regular software.
But beneath the premise which only a small handful of people would be interested in a
character drama more in the mould of Wall Street than computer hacker films like…well, Hackers.
It’s a film built purely on exchanges. You can guess the outcome because Facebook is
still going strong and Zuckerberg occasionally shows his real life persona. What we do get however is a growing trend escalation. As the film continues from the first, brilliant ten minutes, the website grows quickly, finding our characters desperately trying to adapt to the changes that are spiralling out of control.
All goes well to begin with but when Napster founder Sean Parker, played ironicallyby Justin Timberlake enters the fray, everything falls apart and yet, gets better. By the end, we’re left with a film where two wronged but undeserving brutes are awarded compensation, the only likable character is rewarded for fighting back (literally) and Zuckerberg is left as the world’s youngest billionaire with no friends and only his laptop to keep him company.
It’s a strange but memorable film built on the foundations of interaction. While cinematography is minimal (dorms look like dorms and company offices look sleek and sexy), the soundtrack by NIN frontman Trent Reznor is another classic in a year where soundtracks reign supreme. Fans of NIN collection Ghosts I-IV will enjoy the slightly newer versions of older songs whilst the rest of us can enjoy a nice soundtrack of sampled rock and electronic beats.
When all is said and done, The Social Network is a strange but engrossing tale of greed and betrayal with fantastic acting and an engrossing plot. For anyone’s who’s been poked or wanted a reason not to, this one’s for you.
8/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
