Mainstream – Page 55

Agnetha Fältskog & Gary Barlow – I Should Have Followed You Home

“Romantics will want to switch off.”

Tom: Crikey, that is a strong line-up.

Tim: Two former members of huge bands, one duet. Before you push play though: this is an incredibly depressing song and any romantics will want to switch off until tomorrow.

Tim: At least, lyrically it’s very depressing, and that annoys me. Because musically it’s lovely, really – the two of them are at the top of their game and it could so easily be a happy love song.

Tom: It’s lovely, yes, but also a bit dull — and I don’t know what I’ve got to pin that opinion on, only that the “ooh-oohs” in the chorus just left me a bit cold. But yes, it could be a happy love song.

Tim: Instead, we hear about two people who both regret parting after one night. But here’s what really gets me: the middle eight. Or, more precisely, what immediately follows it. (Brace yourself for what’s coming.)

Tom: Have you read more into these lyrics than was intended, by any chance?

Tim: Well, look. Basically, this song could tell a story. It could be a romantic film. We’ve had the basic introduction about the first magical night, we’ve had the regrets the two have felt since. So, enter the middle eight. The closing scenes. The lyrics “Snow falls, street lights paint your face,” and you think they’ve seen each other in the street, after years of anguish. You get her singing “maybe if you want to I’ll see you soon again,” and we know he wants to. So basically, the ending’s obvious: they change the lines for the chorus. The two of them run to each other. They grow old together. They have a family. It’s lovely. Except, no.

Tom: You really do get involved in these tracks.

Tim: Don’t interrupt, I’m getting emotional. You promised it in the lyrics, you even put nice twinkly noises coming into the final chorus to give us all hope, excitement and goosebumps, and then you STOLE IT FROM US. It would haver been WONDERFUL, but no. The two are DOOMED for a LIFETIME APART. WHY HAVE YOU DONE THIS, BARLOW? WHY WOULD YOU TAKE MY HAPPY ENDING?

Tom: Heh. “Happy ending”.

Tim: I’m going to ignore that pathetic innuendo, because I’M CRYING TOO MUCH.

Cody Simpson – La Da Dee

“It’s like candy floss.”

Tim: This is from the wonderful Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs 2, and if that combined with the title doesn’t give you an idea of the saccharine tidal wave that’s rapidly heading this way, there’s something wrong with you.

Tom: Oh crikey. He didn’t even bother with lyrics for most of the chorus.

Tim: The ukelele often irritates me as an instrument, just because it’s basically a guitar foetus and grown men can’t possibly look sensible holding them; Cody here is a case in point.

Tom: Bloody hell, Tim. “Guitar foetus.” That’s going to stick with me for a while.

Tim: You’re very welcome. Entirely not worth noting are the lyrics, being entirely bland – so much so that, as you pointed out, by the chorus the lyricist has given up any pretence that there was once a meaning there and is now just basically putting syllables in an order.

However, neither of those things put me off this because, meaningless as it is, the chorus is just lovely. I’m sure there are grumpy bastards out there who won’t have any of it, but I’ve got a big smile on my face and it’s not going anywhere.

Tom: I can’t even get grumpy about it. It’s just… it’s nothing. It’s like candyfloss: it dissolves instantly, and leaves just a faint wisp of sugar behind. Also, just like candyfloss, I don’t partiuclarly care for it.

Tim: Hmm. Candyfloss is exactly right, actually. But it works for me.

Pitbull feat. Danny Mercer – Outta Nowhere

“The only thing wrong with the track is the man himself.”

Tom: There are rappers who write lyrics that could change the world; there are rappers who burn with energy; there are rappers whose flow is so tight you can barely track what they’re saying as they blaze through lines at a hundred words a minute.

Tim: There are.

Tom: Then there’s Pitbull.

Tim: You know, you keep implying you don’t much like Pitbull, but thanks to all the tracks you’ve brought to the table he’s now our joint-second most featured artist, tied with One Direction and behind only Eric Saade. I hope you’re happy with that.

Tom: The thing is, the hooks are frequently brilliant, the production’s always excellent, and generally the only thing wrong with the track is the man himself. He is, if nothing else, a rich vein of interesting things to write about.

Tim: That, I don’t think anyone will dispute. So let’s see what we can write about here.

Tom: But does he ever actually say anything? There are words, sure, and they’re in some sort of order, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard anything other than vague platitudes from him.

Tim: I noticed him trying to rhyme “player” with “Fred Astaire”. Not entirely sure he pulled that off.

Tom: And there are, what, two unhurried verses in the whole track, surrounded by a hook that’s just begging to be more than a chorus.

Tim: The slowness of them really does grate. Get some actual talent, push them up to twice the pace and we might have a song worth listening to. As it is…

Tom: They got the credits the wrong way round for this one: get Danny Mercer to sing some verses, have Pitbull in as a crowd-grabbing hook, and you might have a decent track here. As it is: it just seems lazy.

Tim: I’m not quite sure about that – sung verses would be nice, but keep the chorus as well. Basically just ditch Pitbull altogether.

Geri Halliwell – Half of Me

“She’s one of the panel on Australia’s Got Talent. Which, given this single, is a bit ironic.”

Tom: She’s one of the panel on Australia’s Got Talent. Which, given this single, is a bit ironic.

Tim: Hahaha – the ‘Desire’ hitmaker strikes again.

Tom: Popjustice described this as “cosmically awful”, which may have tainted my judgement slightly. It’s not a good way to premiere it, either: why on the Footy Show? And who on earth put together the sound production?

Tim: I don’t know – the production doesn’t sound too awful. The expression of the guy on the left before they start dancing in interesting, though.

Tom: More to the point: it’s rare that I can call a track too damn stupid, but – that chorus is just inane. And it never changes. It goes nowhere. The song is three minutes of “meh”, with melodies that would have been considered bland in the worst parts of the 1990s.

Tim: Hmm. I actually failed to notice that there was a second verse in there the first time I heard it – not sure who that comes off worst on. The trumpets are quite nice though. But, again, repetitive.

Tom: Mind you, it’ll probably reach the charts. At least in Australia.

Tim: Possibly, though perhaps not if the part when they ask the stadium of four thousand people what they thought of it and about twenty people cheered is anything to go by.

Rihanna – Pour It Up

“About as not-safe-for-work as you can get before actually just being porn.”

Tom: This video is about as not-safe-for-work as you can get before actually just being porn. Consider yourself warned.

Tim: Oh good lord.

Tom: And you know what? That’s about all I can say for it. That’s not a pop song. That’s not even really a song. It’s a track, I guess? It’s not new, it’s off the album, so it’s not a surprise — but it seems more an excuse to go all-out on the “racy video” front without backing it with decent music.

Tim: That’s exactly the thought I had – as though someone thought “hang on – people are doing porn in music videos at the moment and we need to get in on that. Let’s see, erm, yeah, this is album track’ll that’ll probably work.” As one commenter put it, “I’ve watched actual pornos with better music than this.”

Tom: That said: full marks for the racy video. And for making a bikini out of electroluminescent wire. But mostly for the video.

Tim: Hmm. I’m still not sure about the whole raciness in music videos – don’t really see the point to them, as it’s not as if they had trouble getting views beforehand. But still, it seems to make you happy, so what do I know?

Cher – Woman’s World

“Can be summed up in three words.”

Tom: It’s impossible to write a review about Cher without at least touching on the subject of her age. So let’s get it out the way: she’s 67, she’s got a new album twelve years after the last one, and she looks good.

And now: the lead single, which can be summed up in three words:

Tim: “Bloody weird hair”?

Tom: It’s no “Believe”.

Tim: Oh, yes. That too.

Tom: But then, that was always going to be the case: that Big Song of hers got a Grammy Award and became one of the best-selling singles of all time. Just based on regression to the mean, it ain’t going to be that good.

So let’s try to set those expectations aside: is this actually any good if examined on its own? Well, it’s a good club track, she can clearly still sing, and the message is enough to get a crowd jumping.

Tim: Yes, I think it’s pretty good. Though I do have one problem: the regularly repeated “I’m stronger, strong enough to” bit, which, every single time, makes me want to listen to Kelly Clarkson instead. Because let’s face it that’s a much better track.

Tom: But like so many tracks, there doesn’t seem to be much there: the chorus has been drilled into my head, sure, but I don’t think I like it being in there. It’s, what, one or two notes?

Tim: Well let’s all have a decent chorus then. WHAT DOESN’T KILL YOU MAKES YOU STRONGER. STAND A LITTLE TALLER.

Tom: I suspect that this won’t trouble the Top 10. I also expect Cher won’t be at all troubled by that.

Tim: Probably not. And if I’m honest, neither will I.

Jessica Agombar – Double

A quick “that’s what she said” is most definitely in order.

Tim: A self-described ‘cockney songbird’, here, and quite a nice lyric video.

Tom: There are going to be so many glottal stops, aren’t there?

Tim: Actually no, but a quick heads-up: from now on, my side of this will focus almost entirely on the ambiguous meaning of the main chorus line.

Tim: Well, I think a quick “that’s what she said” is most definitely in order.

Tom: If only the song were as quick. If you’re going to base your whole chorus on one pair of lines, then you’d better make sure they’re bloody amazing. Which, let’s be honest, they’re not. Even the gorgeous animation in the lyric video couldn’t keep my interest. “Come on the double”. Hurr.

Tim: But on the double what? That’s the real question. Double cheeseburger? Double bed? Double entendre, which is probably the most appropriate even if it is just a linguistic construct rather than a physical object. I’m going to go with ‘double cream’ just to keep the vibe going.

Tom: Messy.

Tim: But enough nonsense. I actually think this song’s alright, albeit occasionally slightly dull. I’d say it could be improved by putting a quick ‘here’ in the chorus line before ‘on’, but then I wouldn’t be able to make childish sniggering noises while listening to it so it’s actually fine as it is.

Union J – Beautiful Life

“I wonder if, had they been a year earlier, Union J would have been One Direction?”

Tim: They’re not going to be as big as One Direction. Let’s face it: no-one is. But, at least they’re giving it a decent shot by, well, doing exactly the same things they did.

Tom: I wonder if, had they been a year earlier, Union J would have been One Direction? Is it just a matter of timing, that the market was ready for a new boy band there, and they were good enough and at the right time? Or is there something special about 1D that UJ have – apart from a much better acronym?

Tim: Good question; I don’t know, really. They weren’t really marketed any differently on the show, so it may just be timing. Or Harry’s hair.

But as for what’s the same: fairly loud first track? Yes. Didn’t do quite as well, let’s not dwell on that. Second track: something a bit less low-key. And so we have this. Which, actually, isn’t particularly low-key once the chorus hits so I suppose that’s something.

Tom: It isn’t, but there’s not much I can say for it. It’s a generic ballad that fits into the background. That said, I don’t think I can remember any of their other tracks, so perhaps that fits a pattern.

Tim: In all, I actually prefer this to Carry You – there’s just more to it. The harmonies are more involved, the instrumentation’s more confident in its variation. And I’m quite a fan of grinding metal noises, so that helps as well.

Tom: I wonder how many people, having ripped the audio from the YouTube video, will eventually feel that the song seems “wrong” without the grinding metal?

Tim: Gosh, what a lot of hypothetical questioning we have today. I reckon: a few.

This, really, might have worked better as a lead single – it doesn’t have the soaring chorus, but it does have everything else a good pop song should have.

Tom: Apart from keeping my attention.

The Killers – Shot At The Night

The Killers have gone and done electropop.

Tim: The obligatory new single from the upcoming Direct Hits singles collection, this is produced by M83.

Tom: Ooh, now that’s exciting. That’s a combination I hadn’t thought of.

Tim: Now I’ve told you that, you’ll hit play and about thirteen seconds later think “oh, yeah”.

Tim: So, The Killers have gone and done electropop, and they’ve made quite a decent job of it.

Tom: M83’s influence is obvious, although it’s not quite the full-on explosion of electropop that they’re known for before. It’s a much calmer track than I expected.

Tim: Yes – outside the chorus, it has to be said there’s not a lot going on, aside from a gradually increasing level of anticipation for what’s coming inside the chorus. Because that chorus is fantastic. It makes the song, though that does come with with a sense of disappointment: if the verses matched up to, this could have been one of the songs of the year.

Tom: I still reckon there could be more, even there – M83 are known for producing such massive tracks that even the chorus was a touch disappointing to me.

Tim: You think? Either way, this could be better, and “America’s biggest rock band changes direction and absolutely smashes it” has a nice ring to it; “…and does a manageable job” doesn’t so much. But still, for me, what a chorus.

Britney Spears – Work Bitch

Ah. Generic EDM. Super.

Tim: First new track since the really rather good Femme Fatale album; back then we were playing with dubstep, what’s up this time?

Tim: Ah. Generic EDM. Super.

Tom: Whoa, before we get to the music: what’s with that album cover? Something seems really… well, badly Photoshopped.

Tim: Well, it’s certainly a very narrow waist she’s got going on.

Tom: I know that’s to be expected, but her head doesn’t seem to fit quite onto her body, and the angle of her arm just seems… wrong. Either that’s a really awkward position, or there’s been some rather interesting editing done in post.

Tim: Looking at the mirror reflection, I’d tend towards the former, actually – like she’s leaning as far towards the camera as she possibly can whilst keeping her head tilted back and her arms on the side. You’re right, it is a bit odd.

Tom: Anyway, yes. This really is generic, isn’t it?

Tim: Yes, and very disappointing, for any number of reasons. Lyrics for one (Maserati/Bugatti is as lazy as they come, and you’re using it twice?), dullness of the backing for another, but the biggest one is simply two words: where’s Britney? This could be any singer at all – if it wasn’t Britney, this’d be a track by will.i.am (who is the producer BTW) feat. Vocalist.

Tom: Agreed. She’s talking for a good fraction of it, and what’s left is so distorted by vocoders and production that there’s not really any of her left.

Tim: She’s been one of the biggest pop sensations for all of the past fifteen years – why on earth is her personality almost entirely absent from an album’s lead single? Well, I say almost entirely – the middle eight is good. The middle eight is what the track should be. The middle eight, in fact, turns my reaction from a “what the hell is this?” to a “why the hell is this?”. This should be so, so much better. But it isn’t.