Review - Weezer (Blue Album)




Catchy music makes the world go round, right? I mean, we have these songs that just stick in our heads, whether it be the jangly guitar riff, the lyrics, the vocals, or any aspect of that song in fact. But catchy music can be awful. It can be derivative, trite, unnecessary, cliche, lacking any true emotional bearing. This overload of just plain bad catchy songs means that when you find just one that goes against this, that has this innate musical quality that can simultaneously move you, and force you to sing along with the chorus, it's made that much more special. Try finding 10 of them. Now try finding 10 of them on one album.

That's The Blue Album for you. From the roaring call to arms of 'My Name is Jonas' to the lavish 'Only in Dreams', Weezer have concocted this Power Pop masterpiece. It has all you need to just get into an album; awesome guitar riffs, witty lyrics and just ridiculously catchy choruses. Try getting 'Buddy Holly' out of your head after a few listens. It doesn't happen easily.

This was the first Weezer album that I listened to. I know, shock horror, I'm late to the party. I already had on my iPod 'Island in the Sun', which I found passable, I had 'Beverly Hills', which I thought was cool, and I had 'Pork and Beans', which I found hilariously awesome. Now getting into Weezer in concept alone is a difficult task. I mean, in looking at Weezer you cannot avoid the huge dispute between fans as to their musical quality as time passed. I wanted to see the best album, try and find a good point to continue the enjoyment I had with those 3 singles. Blue Album fit that purpose. It was the most lauded release, had the highest ratings, had 'Buddy Holly', a song that as of a few weeks ago I had never heard, only heard of. It seemed perfect. It was.

I listened to this album once, thought it was OK. 'Buddy Holly' was alright I guess, 'In the Garage' was the first song to grip me, probably because of the lyricism. Now before giving an album a score out of 5, or really giving it a look, I need to hear it at least twice. All the way through, no stops. Then it can be shuffled, but this time I look at the lyrics, let them sink in. I didn't need to look at the lyrics after the second listen. They were in my head.

The more I listened to this the more I yearned for a change in my life, being born a decade earlier, experiencing the decade of music that was the 1990s first hand. It became this insane musical revelation that only built upon my love of 90s music, probably stemmed from Built to Spill's There's Nothing Wrong With Love. Now TNWWL was released in 1994. Same as this. On Last.fm I have a list of the best album every year since I was born. After 4 plays of Weezer's debut, TNWWL was toppled. This was a milestone in my musical appreciation.

In this album I found some sort of solace, sentiments in the lyrics that seemed to resonate strongly with me, as if they had tumbled out of my head and into my speakers. 'No One Else' grabbed me in this way, as did 'Buddy Holly'. I started thinking about my life, the ways in which these songs told me more about myself. Now I know in saying that I reveal a cliche in music reviewing, that being the 'emotional connection that revolutionized my life'. It's not like that. I didn't change my lifestyle, I just reflected more on it, a concept that would grow stronger upon my discovery of Weezer's next album, Pinkerton.

I'm not sure how else I can say to you that this album is a masterpiece. Maybe it can be illustrated in the fact that for about a week or two, everyday I would have one Weezer song in my head. Different songs, always present in the back of my mind. Music that can do that is special. Catchy songs come and go. Masterful songs always stay.

5 stars.


The Downside of Pitchfork...


Music is all about discovery. You yourself stumbling upon or being given something you have never heard. It is how you respond to that music, whether positively or negatively, that defines your relationship with it. So when the most notable (arguable) reviewing website, Pitchfork, realistically has no place for such personal reactions to music, can we really trust them at all?

OK, now don't think I dislike the work of Pitchfork writers and reviewers. Some of them are amazing writers, some reviews so well constructed and written that anything I can write here pales in comparison. But, there are the counterparts to these jewels in the crown of Pitchfork. There are those reviews not grounded in the music or intention, but rather context and circumstance. Take for example the 5.8 given to Chinese Democracy. Now, personally, I thought it was a very good album, not great, but it was listenable and had some great songs on it. Now if it had come out 15 years earlier, it would probably have been heralded a classic, up there with Appetite For Destruction. But we can't change the context of an album, nor can we change its release date. Pitchfork, however, found that to be the greatest source of criticism. They had their minds made up even before they hit play and the title track played through their speakers. Nothing against Ian Cohen, he writes well. He goes through the tracks on the album. But one can't help but notice that the trend throughout his entire review is that the album could never live up to the expectation. Whilst that is a valid concept, he lets it become the whole review, in essence limiting him to only giving it a 5.8.

In contrast, this emotional or personal connection to music that I wrote of in my introduction was shown in another review of Chinese Democracy, this time in the A.V. Club and written by my favourite non-fiction author, Chuck Klosterman. He gave it an A-, which is a great achievement. Now I'm not favouring this review over Pitchfork's because the writer shares my sentiments, no, I prefer it because of the highly personal nature of writing. No Pitchfork writer would claim The final truth is this: He makes the best songs. They sound the way I want songs to sound. A few of them seem idiotic at the beginning, but I love the way they end. Pitchfork writers don't canvas their own feelings towards an album, they see how inventive and original it is, and if it isn't some indie-darling or seemingly mindblowing album (Merriweather Post Pavilion had like 2 great songs and the rest were OK), it is burned at the stake. Even Klosterman predicted this Some people will slaughter Chinese Democracy, and for all the reasons you expect. But he did a good thing here.

So, let's look at this concept of originality. Pitchfork loves indie artists who make albums that they can't say derive from something else. Pitchfork has given great reviews to many of the albums I absolutely love. In fact, Pitchfork is often an indicator to me of whether or not I should listen to an album. Take for example Saturdays = Youth by M83. I love this album so very much. It sounds like it could be an alternate soundtrack to any 80s teen film (also Donnie Darko - which was 2001) and yet Pitchfork loved it, giving it a 8.5. Another album that draws from 80s influences is Phoenix's Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix, which also gained an 8.5. Both M83 and Phoenix's albums I cherish. They take musical tones from the 80s and make it their own. And yet, this notion of adapting other musical eras has formed the basis of a major criticism in many reviews from Pitchfork. Take The Bravery's debut album, which got a 5.3. I found that album by chance. In a tiny review in some trashy MTV magazine years ago there was a paragraph on The Bravery. I looked up the first single, "An Honest Mistake". It was catchy. I went out and bought the CD and have loved that album ever since. I know all the songs, I could probably sing along to most of it. Yet it gets a 5.3 out of 10. And this is because it is supposedly derivative, because it emulates the nu-rock revival. But isn't all music derivative? This very notion of using tonalities and musical themes from the past has caused Pitchfork to degrade Editors, White Lies and any other artist that remotely sounds like Joy Division.

Following on from The Bravery, Pitchfork isn't susceptible to changing opinions. They let the guy who gave the first Bravery album a 5.3, Adam Moerder, write a review for the next Bravery album. Surely, you'd think that if he didn't like their first album, he probably would like their second a lot less? He gave it a 1.8. Maybe Pitchfork just want continuity in their reviews, you know, maintaining a negative slur upon certain artists. But if you purport yourself to be a website that loves music then why purposely set an album up for a failed review?

All I can get from this is that Pitchfork reviews are really patchy. There are some reviews that give great insight into an artist, or the intent of the music, canvassing for the reader the true artistry of a certain band. Then there are those that set out to destroy albums. Pitchfork have been pushing for years now that Conor Oberst/Bright Eyes is becoming a musical liability. He's still awesome. Maybe he's not as awesome as when he first came onto the scene but that is only relative to himself, not to all music. So when they gave his latest effort a 4.9 and the Japandroids' debut an 8.3, you know something's up. I like the Japandroids' album. But it's intentionally stupid garage rock that sounds almost the same every song. Oberst is a musical genius once labelled the new Bob Dylan. Oberst and Japandroids aren't even in the same league. Pitchfork acts to promote select indie artists (did I hear Pitchfork Music Festival?) whilst denigrating their commercial counterparts.

When looking at their reviews, I think some generalisations can be made. Often, if it's over 9.0, it's either genius or insanely overrated. Anything between 7.0 and 9.0 is usually some really solid music. Anything between 5.0 and 7.0 is either average or bands getting a hard time. And below 5.0 is Pitchfork writers showing off. They just want attention. They gave Dan Le Sac vs. Scroobius Pip 0.2 out of 10. I love that album because it is different, because it takes on rap in a completely different way. Pitchfork didn't like it. And rather than give it a respectable 4, as they usually do with albums they don't get along with, they decided to be bastards and go less than 1. Sometimes, you just need to challenge their reviews. They aren't right all the time, in fact they aren't right most of the time. But I did smile when I saw they gave The Love Language's debut a 7.3, so maybe I'm just a disciple.

Pitchfork. Elitist pricks with insanely specific tastes. But they write well.

Soundtrackin' - American Teen

Check out the nice lame 1970s-esque title for this new feature about soundtracks. Just marvel at it.

OK, I've decided to meld together film and music because, well, those are my two passions. Now, I have already done one of these soundtrack things, but in great detail and over on my film blog. That was on Tarantino's Jackie Brown, which is one of my favourite soundtracks ever.

This review will be focused on a film that sort of slipped under the radar over here. I saw it with a group of friends but I don't think a lot of people went to see it. Personally I loved the film, but what was even more imposing was when I got the soundtrack. The film was American Teen and its soundtrack, is well, perhaps better than the film itself.

Now, the reason I'm not going into insane detail as I did with Jackie Brown is because, well, this soundtrack wasn't all used in the film and a lot of it is just a compilation tape that has the fell of the film. And I have no problem with that, because this tracklist is awesome. It is a fun-filled extravaganza of pop, rock and rap.

Tracklist:

1. I'm Not Gonna Teach Your Boyfriend How to Dance with You - Black Kids
2. Great DJ - The Ting Tings
3. Lack of View [Edit] - Sunny Day Sets Fire
4. Breathe In [Jason Bentley Remix] - Frou Frou
5. Great Escape - Patrick Watson
6. Trouble - Cat Stevens
7. Love Is in the Air - John Paul Young
8. Let's Go Out - Ryan Lindsey
9. Dawn of the Dead - Does It Offend You, Yeah?,
10. Kings and Queens - Luna Halo
11. Your Move - Blackalicious
12. Sea Ghost - The Unicorns
13. Adventures in Solitude - The New Pornographers
14. Train - Nyles Lannon
15. Kids - MGMT


Link: Dawn of the Dead [MP3]

Technorati Profile

Visuals - Graveyard Girl

Ok, new feature again. This time focusing on music videos. First up is one of my favourites, Graveyard Girl by M83. Now the album this song is taken from, Saturdays = Youth, is like an alternative soundtrack to every 80s teen movie. For me, that is awesome.

What's even more awesome is that fact that director Matthew Frost is able to make a mini 80s teen movie out of the music video for the album's first single, Graveyard Girl. It involves the stereotypes of the loner, the jock but throws in the twist of a pet cemetery. Trust me, although it might be a little weird, it still can't take away from how cool this video is.

Thought - Happiness is a Warm Song

Note: This is something I wrote a while ago but just found. Maybe this will help more people get into awesome Icelandic music...

I know - awful Beatles reference. Couldn’t help myself.

But - the reason I use that reference is I was listening to Sigur Rós and thought of the concept of “pure happiness”, with that Beatles song being the first song I could think of with ‘happiness’ in the title.

So - pure happiness. What is it? Essentially it is an injection of emotional substitute into some melancholy or even normalcy of being. This emotional substitute is through music. So, I thought to myself, what embodies happiness? Sigur Rós.

Three songs that define happiness through their music:

Hoppípolla - video

Completely overused (and therefore perhaps overrated) tune that really shows us hope in musical form. It’s no wonder that every web video and movie trailer (I’m looking at you Slumdog Millionaire) is using this song to chronicle some epic journey of the soul. It has a sublime piano riff that continues throughout the song and will get stuck in your head (guaranteed), assisted by some atmospheric drums and guitar. Awesome, perhaps iconic song that ultimately shows happiness through hope.

Gobbledigook - video

OK, before last night, I always thought that this song was pure happiness. Plain and simple, I thought it reflected inspiration in music. However, upon greater reflection I see that it shows a major part of happiness - freedom. As the music video itself shows, through the use of nudists cavorting around a forest, happiness is the ability to be free, to be yourself and to be together, both with others and with nature (argh Emily Dickinson reference).

Inní mér syngur vitleysingur - video

This song is pure happiness. There we go. I guess although I really liked this song prior to my discovery, it was pushed on by Slumdog Millionaire once more. In an obscure way of course. Ryan McNutt, on his blog mixed SM with this song for a Best of 2008 mixtape. And did it work. So, last night when perusing my iTunes library for Sigur Rós after a huge amount of thought put into deciphering the Hopelandic lyrics of Hljómalind (I did), I stumbled upon this song. It is happiness. From the chimes to the kicking beat, this song is amazing. It’s no surprise the english translation is “within me a lunatic sings”. It truly seems to be about self-actualisation and the appreciation of one’s being (wow, that was deep thought). I think I worked that out last night, playing the air drums to the joyous beat of this song.

So yeah. Pure Happiness. I’m sure there are heaps of other songs - I just thought of these ones first.

Link: Inní mér syngur vitleysingur [MP3]

Epics - The Mariner's Revenge Song

Another new section - Epics. It does what it says on the tin. Basically, any really long song is an epic, whether it be 7min (not really that epic) to 60min (completely epic). But minutes are not always what counts. Verses and narrative also come into play, as well as my ability to decipher the said narrative. And that is why I have left Dylan's Desolation Row for another time - no one understands it.So for the first epic I went modern, looking at The Decemberists' 8:48min ode, The Mariner's Revenge Song. So, why is it epic? Are you kidding? Break it down into three-line verses and it's nearing 30 of them. And it's all a cohesive narrative. That's why.

We are two mariners
Our ship's sole survivors
In this belly of a whale

Its ribs our ceiling beams
Its guts our carpeting
I guess we have some time to kill

Basically, the song entails the recount of a mariner, who has ended up inside the belly of a whale with a man he has been searching for the last 15 years. As the song unfolds, we hear of this mariner's connection to the other man and why he seeks the death of him. It is awesome. Someday I hope to memorize this song. As simplistic as the tale may seem, Colin Meloy makes it all the more intriguing with some very peculiar specific details and dialogue. Anyways, now I am just rambling.

Check out the song. It is awesome, as is the rest of the album it is taken from, Picaresque.

Link: The Mariner's Revenge Song [MP3]

Further Reading - Questionable Content

This will be the second post in a row that features Maco. Good for him.

Anyways, in this feature aptly entitled "Further Reading", I'm just gonna point you towards some awesome links and site that revolve around music.

So first up is the webcomic Questionable Content. Don't be misled by its alluring title, QC is a comic grounded both in music and in relationships. What an original mix. But seriously, ever since Maco showed it to me, thinking I would "get" the copious amounts of musical references, I have been hooked.
Created by J. Jacques, it is hillarious, compelling and in many aspects eye-opening and so I urge you to follow this narrative chronicling the trials and tribulations of Marten and his friends. Oh and btw - start from the beginning. I know it is a trek to get through them all, I'm only at 852 at the moment, but it is well worth it.Link: Questionable Content