Tim: Will we find it less repetitive than Elektrisk?
Tim: A bit, yes.
Tom: Only a bit.
Tim: Towards the end it still goes on a bit. Doesn’t help that I’m not entirely certain what a Party Crusher might be, but still. The verses are okay, and there’s a decent tune there. The only problem is that there’s no YEAH moment, and yet I feel this song is crying out for one – whether it be a key change, a sudden return from a quieter middle eight, or even just a loud noise somewhere.
Tom: “Formulaic” can mean good or ill; if the formula’s really good, then there’s nothing wrong with pushing out a track that follows it – heaven knows there are plenty of cracking songs that have little originality to them. But this is just a by-the-numbers album track, and my word if she says ‘party crusher’ one more time…
Tim: Basically, it’s a nice enough song – background of a party, album track, whatever – but a bit uninspiring.
Tim: We all know the original; let’s have a cover that promises, from the outset, to be predictable in a lovely way.
Tom: Bloody hell, Tim, what is it with you and songs from adverts? Admittedly this one isn’t written about the product itself, but I do worry about you sometimes. Anyway. Yes. Predictable?
Tim: Wait – did I say predictable? Damn. Because what I was going for was, well, we have the well-known and loud original and a very calm start, so this is going to be a builder, right?
Tim: Thank you very much. We’re going to start sweet and tinkly, let’s have a guitar backing for the first chorus, and then some gentle drums as well for the rest of it. Hell, for the middle eight we could even introduce a string ensemble!
Tom: This would have been lovely. Euphoric finale, lighters in the air. Instead…
Tim: No. It’s just dull. Despite her great soaring voice, which does deserve a mention as it is fantastic, it’s just dull. Dull, dull, dull; reminiscent of tea, in fact, which is, appropriately enough, where this song first appeared.
Tom: Absolutely – I’m not complaining about the singer, just about the production.
Tim: Standard robotic voice that we’ve come to expect from ‘this sort’ of musician (if you know what I mean) (i.e. not particularly musical) (i.e. not remotely musical if he doesn’t have his auto-tuner); decent enough tune, at least once he’s shut up and given what for the main synths; anything else to add?
Tom: You missed the standard euphoric build (as wonderfully deconstructed by Brett Domino at the end of this medley) and the standard breakdown in the middle. It’s… well, it’s standard, isn’t it?
Tim: Friend of the site Ed has demanded that we review this band, suggesting a rap song they did, Je Veux Te Voix, or this one, the video of which has considerably fewer terrifying cast members. So we’re going with this.
https://youtu.be/GxFa9HLdhIY
Tom: That’s… well, I can’t tell if it’s 60s, 80s, or modern. Perhaps that’s just the video’s effect, though. I must thank the numerous YouTube commenters pointing out the brief flash of nipple there. I might have missed it otherwise.
Tim: No doubt the various toys and things in the video would make sense if my French was at a decent enough level to understand this (though I’m not sure anything could justify two dinosaurs mounting each other); musically, though, well, it’s alright. It’s admittedly not what I’d choose to put on a playlist, but I’d be happy hearing it at, say, a house party or something.
Tom: See, I rather like it. It’s happy, bouncy, and even ends on a little whistle.
Utter crap, and its being for charity does not excuse it.
Tom: It’s the Children in Need single, and it’s…
Tim: …an absolute fucking disgrace? I know that’s a rude word, and sorry, but Jesus Christ, what the shit is bloody well going on, and why did…well, just why?
Tom: I know there’s been a share of downbeat Children in Need singles over the years – the glorious version of Lou Reed’s ‘Perfect Day’ being the standout one. But surely none of them have been quite as … meh as this one.
Tim: This is, oh, God it’s awful. My feeling right now, is just total incomprehension. How did this happen? What was Gary Barlow thinking when he put this together?
Tom: It’s a fairly well known track, I suppose, and I feel like I should give it the benefit of the doubt as it’s for charity and all that.
Tim: No. No, no, no. Charity: good. This: utter crap, and its being for charity does not excuse it. Okay, sensible critique: first off, no one there seems to care. There’s no emotion, no feeling, just a group of music performers reading a few words out. And speaking of the words: they’re weird. Apparently a poem written by a teenager*, towards the end there’s the ‘be anything you want to be’ idea which is nice, but thrown in randomly is something about a wise man telling the time on a cheap watch, and at the start we’ve got Ms Dynamite giving us a grammar lesson. Seriously? I mean, W T ACTUAL F is going on?
* I can hear the planning meeting now: “OMG, I love that idea, it’s so amazing, think of all the emotional depth there’ll be, it’ll totally appeal to all the poor kids out there.”
Tom: That final chorus does have quite a triumphant edge to it, but it took a long, long time to get there.
Tim: Yeah, and it’s all very well putting the upbeat music and lyrics at the end, but if everyone’s feeling suicidal by then all you’re really doing is damage control.
Tom: So here’s my thought: yes, give to Children in Need. But do it by grabbing the old McFly track instead. It’s a lot more fun.
Tim: Hell yeah it is. In fact, let’s watch it now.
Tom: Or in other words, “a band not really known”.
Tim: Matt Hewie, a bloke who has replaced the female what was in that group.
Tom: But not well enough to just be assimilated into the credits with the main group, it seems.
Tim: Put Your Hands, their new song.
Tim: Music here is good – not sure how to describe it, but it’s the sort of back and forth hook bit that comes after the chorus. You know the bit I mean. Yeah, that one. I like it.
Tom: It sounds a bit Aqua-ish, actually; similar tone to the voice and, yes, that back-and-forth bit.
Tim: Lyrics are also fun – I’m loving the juxtaposition of ‘I want you to fall in love with me’ and ‘I want to do you baby night and day’. That last bit reminds me of a whiteboard we’ve got a work; it’s supposed to be some sort of inspirational thing and it says ‘I did something amazing today’. Every time I walk past it I wish I had the guts to get out a marker and change ‘something’ to ‘someone’, just FOR THE LOLZ.
Tom: Do it. Or, better yet, carefully alter a copy of it in Photoshop, reprint it, and see how long it takes for anyone to notice.
Tom: 150 million views on YouTube, still in rotation on the radio. Why am I talking about this? Because it’s exceptional.
Tim: Bugger me, that’s a big teddy bear.
Tom: Now there’s a sentence that’s not been said before. Anyway – twice now, while listening to the radio, I’ve wondered ‘ooh, what’s this song?’ and put it through Shazam. That’s rare for me – I’ve only used Shazam a dozen or so times in the last year.*
* I was almost disappointed, when it came up a second time, that Shazam didn’t say “you’ve already tagged this, you idiot, and then promptly forgotten it”.
Tim: Ah, well if you want to have fun with AI, you want to get yourself Siri.
Tom: Okay, we get it, you work at an Apple store.
Clearly something in the song really works for me; while I might like other songs on the radio, I don’t like them enough to find out what they are – twice – so I can download them later. It’s a textbook pop song, really; happy, entertaining, and a proper singalong hook.
Tim: Part of it is the unexpectedness of it – you’re sort of thinking it’ll be along the lines of Do It Like A Dude, or whatever that other crap one was, but it’s actually good. (Think I might have made this point before – I remember saying California King Bed was a fantastic prime example.)
Tom: And here’s the bit that really gets me: a rap bit that works. B.o.B is damn good at what he does, and he’s mellow enough to fit with the rest of the song. Put Flo Rida in here, and it’d be bloody awful.
Tim: I have a new-found annoyance about rap bits in songs: ever since Tulisa became an X Factor judge, it has seemingly become compulsory to rewrite the words if you’re performing it yourself (or even add new ones to originally good songs). I find this HORRIFICALLY irritating.
Tom: My word. That’s the first I’ve seen of this year’s X Factor. It’s… it’s terrible.
Tim: This is nice – uplifting, the inspirational kind of charity single rather than the doom and gloom one.
Tom: There are two very different approaches to charity singles: the sad ballad or the uplifting, enthusiastic one. Or, of course, you could put zombies in your music video, but then that’s just McFly.
Tim: The thing is – this song seems really familiar. It’s not that it reminds me of a different song – I just have this feeling I’ve heard it before.
Tom: Yep. It’s as if someone mashed a dozen vaguely uplifting records together.
Tim: Given that it’s an original song, there’s one conclusion – this is entirely generic. Which, let’s be honest, it is, but it’s not a great thing, really, is it?
Tom: It’s not officially ‘released’ until Hallowe’en, but it’s been getting tremendous amounts of airplay.
Tim: I just had to watch a thirty second advert for Run For Your Life. I’m already in a negative frame of mind.
Tom: AdBlock, Tim. Anyway – this song? It’s a weird one.
Tim: Weird is an excellent word to use here.
Tom: The best comparison I have for this is the Black Eyed Peas’ “Dirty Bit” – the regular part of it isn’t all that bad, but as soon as it goes into a strange, discordant breakdown it just becomes too strange.
Tim: To be honest, I’m too engrossed trying to work out what’s moving where in the video to listen properly, and the music seems a bit secondary. Without the video – standard Beyoncé fare, it seems.
Tom: Is this even danceable? I’m not sure. It does go on a bit, certainly, and this is the first time I’ve thought that a video was just too overproduced. That final, realistic smile – the last shot in the video – really does come as a relief.
Very good, but that energy just doesn’t quite translate.
Tom: I saw City Stereo live last week, and – my word – they deserved to be so much more than the first support act. Live, they are stunning, with every bit of stage presence that you’d expect from a band that have supported McFly in the past.
Tim: Hmm, not bad.
Tom: If they’re not live, though; they seem a lot more generic, somehow. Still very good, but that energy that I saw on stage – that converted a dull early-night crowd to enthusiastic cheering – just doesn’t quite translate. Most pop-punk bands can sound like this with a decent producer, but to sing and play that well live on stage takes some serious talent.
Also, I feel I should mention the gratuitous partial nudity in the video. I’m not complaining at all, just mentioning it.
Tim: When have you ever complained about partial nudity?
Tom: In a music video? Not since Robbie Williams in Rock DJ, I reckon. Put me right off my lunch.
