― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 27 July 2006 09:50 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:00 (seventeen years ago) link
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:02 (seventeen years ago) link
in a nutshell.
i thought they were a joke or something.
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:21 (seventeen years ago) link
unfinishable.
"not so much retro as they are post-retro, the product of an age in which progression in pop music has all but been replaced by cultivation and fusion"
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:30 (seventeen years ago) link
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:35 (seventeen years ago) link
"That the Pipettes are doing Shangri-La's impersonations on stage is almost a moot point."
or
"The twist is meant to be that these three are sexually aggressive, have read their French feminism, own some riot grrrl records, and have distinct, unique personalities in a sort of Spice Girls way."
I could also swear that there was a line in the review early yesterday morning that has since been removed about how The Arcade Fire and Band of Horses should be playing arenas but have to settle for just being indie bands because there is no justice!!
― Sean Braud1s (Sean Braudis), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:40 (seventeen years ago) link
― The Lex (The Lex), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:41 (seventeen years ago) link
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 27 July 2006 10:56 (seventeen years ago) link
Not a bad article, that, except they missed out the stripy French fisherman's jumper.
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:38 (seventeen years ago) link
horrid
― kevin barking (arghargh), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:56 (seventeen years ago) link
― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 27 July 2006 12:09 (seventeen years ago) link
I actually think Pitchfork writing is pretty decent at times, and while I didn't express it (it was late and I was hoping others would start some discussion) the review should be a talking point because it 1) apologizes for faux-retro irony in the lamest possible terms, 2) gives them feminism shoutouts while glossing over the four boys who play the music, and 3) hilariously attempts to give indie-pop some kind of big-scheme importance or cultural weight.
And I know it's irrelevant outside the USA. Do you think that I care? Ignore the topic, brotha. It's easy, there are plenty more.
― Sean Braud1s (Sean Braudis), Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:13 (seventeen years ago) link
I find them trying for this big 60s girl group sound and getting it so badly wrong actually endearing (big crashing drums etc). If they'd been a faithful facsimile of their influences I doubt I'd find them anywhere NEAR as entertaining.
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:26 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:47 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:48 (seventeen years ago) link
agreed
and there's nothing faux
ahem
or ironic
HAHAHA
about these aspects.
― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 27 July 2006 21:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:05 (seventeen years ago) link
2.a. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" Richard Kain.b. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity.
I mean, you could MAYBE argue that there was incongruity when SHA NA NA first appeared on the scene, but I would think retroisms have become established as fairly commonplace over the last couple of decades.
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:12 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:14 (seventeen years ago) link
― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link
― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:26 (seventeen years ago) link
Maybe it's a sincere homage to the music/style they love, more likely it's a visual stunt to attract comments along the lines of "well aren't they cute." I don't know if I'd be more concerned about male fans who kinda got off on it, or those that didn't.
It wouldn't even be that bad a song if not for the obnoxious cheerleader-style shouting of the title. Am I supposed to take that any way other than as irony in 2006?
That the Pipettes are doing Shangri-La's impersonations on stage is almost a moot point.
That is an apology. That is what an apology sounds like. Whether it was necessary or not I don't really care, but he clearly wants to gloss over the fact that the Pipettes are pushing their image at least as hard as their songs.
― Sean Braud1s (Sean Braudis), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:29 (seventeen years ago) link
The disappointing thing about the album is that the fellow from Go! Team is involved in the production. On paper I would really like to hear a bricabracolage skip hop girl group along the lines of the G!T but with, you know, songs and harmonies and stuff. But the way the record turned out is sooooo weedy.
― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:52 (seventeen years ago) link
― youn (youn), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:56 (seventeen years ago) link
Again, what is ironic about it?
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 22:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:06 (seventeen years ago) link
― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:11 (seventeen years ago) link
― jed_ (jed), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:14 (seventeen years ago) link
― electric sound of jim [and why not] (electricsound), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:15 (seventeen years ago) link
I was making a crass rhetorical point, get over it. It's too hot in here...
― Louis Jagger (Haberdager), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 27 July 2006 23:30 (seventeen years ago) link
― keyth (keyth), Friday, 28 July 2006 02:10 (seventeen years ago) link
― electric sound of jim [and why not] (electricsound), Friday, 28 July 2006 02:14 (seventeen years ago) link
― kevin barking (arghargh), Friday, 28 July 2006 02:23 (seventeen years ago) link
― electric sound of jim [and why not] (electricsound), Friday, 28 July 2006 02:28 (seventeen years ago) link
INDIE
a proper pop group would have not got anything wrong. shiny shiny perfect facsimiles all the way
― The Lex (The Lex), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:10 (seventeen years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:16 (seventeen years ago) link
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:22 (seventeen years ago) link
― The Lex (The Lex), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:29 (seventeen years ago) link
The Puppini Sisters. Why on earth were you watching ITV3?!
― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:43 (seventeen years ago) link
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:45 (seventeen years ago) link
― Matt DC (Matt DC), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:48 (seventeen years ago) link
cracker repeats!
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:48 (seventeen years ago) link
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 28 July 2006 07:51 (seventeen years ago) link
― -- (688), Friday, 28 July 2006 08:14 (seventeen years ago) link
i dunno tim, when you say "clunky or clumsy" i just think : yes, it is those things. as for their vocals yes, i guess they sound "fine" but they're a vocal group, right? vocal groups should sound great vocally!
(i have only heard two songs - the ones on their site with videos)
― jed_ (jed), Friday, 28 July 2006 08:19 (seventeen years ago) link
― Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 28 July 2006 08:51 (seventeen years ago) link
― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Friday, 28 July 2006 08:51 (seventeen years ago) link
What are the perceived imperfections on "Pull Shapes?" I don't really get it. Is it really much more clunky or clumsy than, say, Bananarama?
they're a lot shoutier and 'reaching' more than Bananarama because the song seems to demand it but as they really seem only in the same league as Bananarama as singers it's not totally convincing (but still endearing perhaps).
― Konal Doddz (blueski), Friday, 28 July 2006 08:54 (seventeen years ago) link