Tom: Despite my best efforts, ‘Party Rock Anthem’ got stuck in my head earlier this year. Here’s the new single: is it anywhere near as catchy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N30dQ-MU0Y
Tom: No it’s not.
Tim: Oh God, that’s awful. Just, blurgh.
Tom: Which is a pity, because that build really promises great things that the rest of the track doesn’t deliver. The question that remains: will the British public take to this far-too-late summer track, or will they only manage to be one-hit wonders?
Tim: One hit wonders. Plese, let it be one hit wonders.
Tom: And just to be clear: ‘wiggle wiggle’ wasn’t all that good even when the Outhere Brothers did it.
Tom: Right, let’s have a look at the other half of the double A-side then. This is the out-of-character one, right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSzsecNdQKo
Tom: Oh my. Well, that’s very… 2010s.
Tim: Yeah – less of the universal love thing, more of a, well, Taio Cruz, In The Club, let’s get drunk and have sex thing. Disappointing – I could cope with the style, but Aqua always used to be happy and family-friendly, with a fair helping of cheeky innuendo; here, that’s all gone out of the window and it’s a bit of a shame.
Tom: Wait, hang on! Did she just swear? I didn’t see that coming.
Tim: Exactly. Similar in one very noticeable way to another song we recently covered – this may just be coincidence, or it may be that unexpected obscenity is the new trend in Scandinavia. As a musical style it’s somewhat fun, but in an Aqua track it just seems so wrong.
Tom: I was in France recently, and found that some of their radio stations play English-language tracks entirely uncensored, including some properly obscene rap lyrics. It was a surprising journey, that one.
Tim: In my sister’s car, with my granddad, with a compilation CD she’d made on in the background. Moment of silence in the conversation, out comes a Cee Lo Green track. Yes, that Cee Lo Green track.
Tim: Released last Monday, a double A-side single, preceding their new album due out in Denmark two weeks today. One – Playmate to Jesus – is close to know-and-love-them Aqua, the other – Like A Robot – is less so, but still interesting. Let’s start with the first one.
Tom: A third album! The legendary third Aqua album. I don’t mind saying I’m rather looking forward to it, even after the disappointment of their last single.
Tim: It’s not quite Barbie Girl territory, but this will certainly please older fans, I reckon. Calmer melody, family-friendly stuff.
Tom: Well, it’s pleased me. Apollo-mission beeps as part of the intro melody, and a proper full-on chorus. I do hope they tour, because I will be there.
Tim: It seems that Réné’s definitely decided to become a proper singer, though, and I’m not sure if that spoils it a bit. If I have one criticism, I reckon this song could be made about 20% faster and it would sound (a) more Aqua-y, (b) better and (c) less almost-five-minutes-long.
Tom: Not sure about the actual “Playmate to Jesus” lyric, though. Seems a bit needlessly, well, Jesus-y. He wasn’t really one for space exploration, was he?
Tim: No, but he did preach the whole universal love thing (and is perhaps the most notable person to have done so, if you don’t count Cliff Richard), and that’s what the song really comes down in the end. A nice, happy song.
Tim: On Tuesday, you said of Velvet: “She’s quite good, isn’t she?” Well, yes. I present a Melodifestivalen 2008 entry.
Tom: Full disclosure: during this review, I was somewhat distracted by her outfit.
Tim: I would expect nothing less. Formula-watchers will be somewhat horrified by the fact that the chorus proper doesn’t start until almost a minute in, leaving – SHOCK HORROR – no room for a proper middle eight once we’ve got the second verse/chorus out of the way as well.
Tom: That build to the first chorus makes up for it, though!
Tim: It does, but I can’t help wondering: was the lack of middle eight, and its associated crazy and original dance moves, the reason for the somewhat disappointing fifth place in the semi-final? Well, who knows.
Tom: Fifth in the semis, even with that key change? Blimey, that must have been a good Melodifestivalen.
Tim: All I’ll say right now is that the final winner was Hero, by Charlotte Perrelli. Enough said. Back to this song, what I do know is that, middle eight or not, it’s a cracking piece of work.
Tom: Hang on. Is he actually singing on this? There’s no “featuring” on those opening ‘woah’s.
Tim: I’m a bit disappointed he’s dropped his trademark ‘na-na-nai’. Not because it was good or anything – it was awful – but it did serve to warn you what you were getting into.
Tom: Amazing track. Terrible lyrics. You’re not Kurt Cobain, Dappy. And did you just sympathise with Chris Brown? And name-drop Marty McFly? And quote “if I die before I wake”? And claim to be Richard Branson? And quote the Italian Job? And Oasis?
Tom: Oh, he is, because there’s a snip of an Oasis track being sampled just before it. That’s… that’s actually clever. Okay, I’ll let that one slip.
Tim: And secondly, if just those got you worked up, it’s probably a good thing you seem not to have noticed the remarkably dodgy Prince William line: “I’m a prince, yes I will get the crown/Kate stays in my dungeon when her sister’s round.”
Tom: Simply put: I want an instrumental of this, because his entirely unjustified references are really, really angering me. Which is a pity – because I like the music.
Tim: Well, that’s not stopped you liking a track before. And also, I was going to defend this by saying it fit with the idea of song and what it was all about, just because seeing you worked up like this is quite fun, but I’ve looked at the lyrics and I have no idea what he’s really on about.
Tom: That piano middle eight is lovely, the choruses are brilliant – particularly that final one with the unexpected key change! Dappy, on the other hand… well, what a shame.
Tim: That key change, combined with that Prince William line, leaves me with one final thought: I LOVE THIS TRACK.
Old school rock and roll? Country? I’m not sure, but it’s brilliant.
Tom: Brace yourself, Tim; she’s back to a typical Gaga video. It’s 47 seconds before the music starts. Although she does appear to be appearing almost as herself, with barely a ridiculous costume – well, barely anything – at least once in here.
Tim: Is there a point to Lady Gaga’s videos other than to get people to say, “What the hell was that all about?” Because I don’t have a clue.
Tom: But what a wonderful bit of music. It’s… well, what genre is it? Old school rock and roll? Country? I’m not sure, but it’s brilliant.
Tim: It is. Not quite Alejandro or Bad Romance brilliant, mind, and certainly not Edge of Glory, but on a par with Born This Way and Judas. Good work.
Tom: It’s not going to be lighting up the clubs without a remix, but can you imagine how good this will sound live? The woman can sing, Tim, she really can.
Tim: I think that right now you’d have to go a long way to find someone who’d disagree with you there.
Tom: It’s not spectacular, but I reckon it’s a solid middle-of-DJ-set track that won’t make anyone leave the dancefloor. It’s by-the-numbers, but they’re very good numbers.
Tim: They are, aren’t they. Just straight-down-the-middle, this-is-what-you-dance-to stuff.
Tom: That clock-tick bridge out of the middle eight? With full speakers and lighting on a dancefloor, and a good crowd, I might even go so far as to justify ‘epic’.
Tim: Ooh, high praise indeed. I’m surprised we haven’t yet featured Velvet, despite her releasing many excellent tracks over the years, including an interesting cover of Eddy Grant’s Electric Avenue.
Tom: I’m surprised I haven’t heard of her before. She’s quite good, isn’t she?
Tim: Hello children! In today’s music lesson, we’re going to learn a song that I want you all to sing to mummy and daddy when you go home tonight.
Tom: That starts out so happy, and… well, I guess it continues happy, doesn’t it? What a brilliant track.
Tim: What’s most interesting about this is the way that until the chorus hits, the lyrics just sort of washed over me, even when I tried to listen to them to get what the song was about. Come the chorus, there they are, bang, unmissable. (And leaving very little doubt as to what the song was about.)
Tom: The thing is, it’s actually a good song as well. Okay, so “Shut Up And Sleep With Me” has been almost this direct before, but that’s not nearly as well-rounded a tune as this. It’s genuinely well-written and well-produced, and the video is classy to boot.
Tim: Yes, the music really is good – tune, vocals, energy, it’s all there and great (although with that chorus you’d have to do a lot to calm it down), so I like this a lot. And not just because I can shock my grandparents with it next time they visit.
Tim: Number 1 in Denmark, this is. Let’s see if we agree with them.
Tom: That starts slowly, doesn’t it? I don’t have high hopes.
Tim: Well, yes, the first verse – a little uninspiring. First chorus – kicks it up a bit, starts to work for me. Second verse – better than the verse with the drumbeat. Second chorus – again works for me.
Tom: You’re right; it’s a slow builder, but build it does; by that second chorus I was rather looking forward into it.
Tim: Interesting pause in the middle eight, giving a sense of anticipation. Closing part—
Tom: Come on, big triumphant final chorus…
Tim: …what the hell was that? Nothing. It’s a massive disappointment.
Tom: I wasn’t expecting a ridiculous key change or anything – it’s far too classy a song for that – but it does seem like a bit of a poor effort. No gospel choir?
Tim: Alas, no. Overall, it’s okay – it’s just very much let down by the ending.
Tim: When we featured them only a few days ago, it seems I was shamed by not knowing there was heavy sampling involved. I wish to redeem myself by saying that I am entirely aware that this, another Electric Lady Lab track from last June, also has sampling involved. Two things:
No video, just several thousand still pictures.
They are the only band (I’m informed by the internet) to have been given permission to sample the track that they are sampling.
Tom: Okay, I think I get Electric Lady Lab’s shtick now. They sample old 80s tracks, add new vocals to them, and chuck them out as new songs.
Tim: Actually, most of it’s original – just a couple, really. (Oh, and PEDANT: this is from 1990).
Tom: Which, let me remind you, is 21 years ago. Feel old yet?
Tim: Not as old as you, Mr Two-years-older-than-me.
Tom: Anyway, as I said before, I like mashups – but the tracks they’re putting out are just anaemic. The old ones are better: mashups and samples should improve on the original and make something better, not just add a weak new vocal.
Tim: Here, I actualy agree with you – it takes away a lot of the focus from fact that it’s a new the new song, because every single moment that they’re not singing it sounds like Rhythm Is A Dancer, just because it’s so implanted into people’s head. The singing is excellent, when it’s there, and worthy of being in a great song – just not this well-known a song, because it just sounds like a mash-up.
Tom: Granted, it’s better than the travesty we had last week, but it’s still not good.
Tim: Bonus related fact: “I’m serious as cancer when I say rhythm is a dancer” was once voted the worst lyric of all time.
