Sign In:

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Anti hype is the new in thing. So says us. DiS picks 5 bandwagons to steer well clear of in 2005.

It’s January; must be time for the music media to spend a couple of weeks trying to set the tone for the year by picking three-to-five bands they can be oh-so-right about predicting the success of.

By success, what they really mean is a label will spunk a ridiculous amount of marketing cash on said band. A lot of boxes can be ticked. Then they can give bands undue and completely disproportionate praise, and in some worse cases support in the form of mainstream airplay - especially if in the quiestest single sales week of the year the band manage to sell 1000 copies and get in the top 20! Because chart positions REALLY MATTER, a lot more than whether the band are good or can play to 100,000 people in the space of a week on tour, yet recieve little to no media attention as what they do isn't bland and hasn't been bought by 12 year old smash hits readers.

The repercussions of this 'success', and it enables bands to have the 'high' profile to get onto festival bills and play to even more people, despite being utterly rubbish. And this success perpetuates and spirals out of control. People pat themselves on the back so hard for getting this kinda shit right that little to no thought is left for other bands.

In reality, many of these lists in lesser publications have more to do with coke-room glamour akin to spotting Kate Moss at some trendy bar, than anything to do with the music and creavitity itself. It’s sick and wrong and it happens every year. Thankfully, the british public are stoopid, so every year a slew of bands ranging from terrible to mediocre reap the rewards of this code of conduct, whilst the media can safely ignore hundreds of other artistes they’ve not invested their plaudits and dodgy reputation within. Once you're in the i-only-buy-five-records-a-year and what-music-do-you-like-OH-ANYTHING club, you've got a good strong three months before the threat of a backlash, when said media realise no-one likes the music, nor the sexist tossers in the band.

What this all sadly means is that great artistes who don't make these lists struggle to get airplay, press features, support slots and onto festival bills, just because of these lists. 20years from now, these artistes, through a movie soundtrack or a tragic death, suddenly get the given spotlight. Suddenly they're life-affirming geniuses.

In lieu of DiS being part of the problem and doing much the same list thing, and despite realising that content like this reaffirms certain organisation's importance, and being fully aware you have your own ears, we’ve gone ahead and let our resident ranter SEPTiC CLiT outta her piss-pant solitary confinement and let her loose on a pile of this years hyped bands/records. And so it goes:

Dear Beautiful Reader,
Some things just have to be said. There are some atrocities a-comin' and you better be prepared. Take heed of the following list of heathens who may very well be playing a town or festival near you over the course of the upcoming year. Do not, under any circumstances, be talked into going to see them by your friend who got the Razorlight album for christmas. He is not cool! And if you really have to buy into the hype, please wait until the band reach their peak some time after Glastonbury before trying to flog stuff on eBay (you'll make a lot more money than the band will recoup that way!).
Black lists at the ready...

5. ATHLETE
This year's Snow Patrol. Expect student sensationalism in Supernaturals/Purressence proportions. Their album of pure filler could just be the reason why a whole generation disregards all new music, ever. At least their mum-rock is keeping some poor a&r man in a job.

4. THE OTHERS
Oooooh I say, they play battery powered amps up trees! They shoulda called themselves The Monk-key’s or something cleverer like that. You’ve heard about the stunts, but have you heard anyone talk about their music being any good? No, didn’t think so.
What doesn’t make sense is why anyone would want to listen to a bunch of prissy rich kids moaning about how they’re part of the proletariat, and giving blow by blow cock-in-face descriptions of just how boring modern society is.

3. SECRET MACHINES
The broadsheets love them? T4 are bigging them up? Their new single, with its punk-pop meets BRMC-ness has crawled in everwhere, yet their Jesus & Mary Chain/Mercury Rev raping is so sparse you barely notice the record's on. They’ve been given and taken up far too much time already.

2. TOWERS OF LONDON
Quite literally the fucking worst band in the history of the world, ever. Yet for some fucking ridiculous reason they’ve been given buzz status in London and some cunt-truck in some deep pit of inhumanity has given them a deal. ToL are old men who were probably in a band that sounded like the Verve until ‘Permission to Land’. They will be making 'music' for people who think ‘Punk’ is about playing badly, spitting and fascism.
Thankfully the real Motley Crue return this year, so any cred’ they’re given will be as short-lived as their attention spans.

1. THE BRAVERY
Warning: This band are not a joke.
There’s nothing worse than a bunch of ageing greasers getting all camped up and covering Duran Duran. Well, there is something worse, and that’s calling the covers your own songs, having a shite dead-pan vocal and playing your songs with all the soul of a burnt Starbucks coffee grain. They desperately want you to love them and they don’t care if that means trying so hard that their 2-legged dogs lose respect for them.
If you thought Jet ripping off 'Lust for Life' was insulting, just wait until you have the misfortune to catch this year's Kings of Leon.
If you tolerate this, a plague of fake tan wearing faux-boy-bands will be next.

P.S. an urgent memo to all those of you reading in America, here's a pair of bands who’ve had some ‘success’ here and are on their way to get into major label debt in a dustball near you…

KASABIAN
On first impressions they’re doing for Madchester what Ali G and Goldie Lookin’ Chains have done for suburban hip hop culture and ‘chav’. But for all the Bez dancing and Primal Scream by numbers digital noises, they end us being as ironic as Alanis Morrisette, as fun as herpes and as imaginative as a lazy STD comparison.
Please note: The correct pronunciation is KASA-BYE-ANNE.

THE THRILLS
They write songs with about three lyrics which loop and loop until they've spiralled into your brain. They write songs soley to get girls on their boyfriends shoulders. And they're Irishmen with bad beards. Run, save yourselves!

DiScuss: This list is far from complete. Please insert your venting below. What can we do to drive the media away from this ridiculous chart-led form of ego-masturbation and allow music to become popular for music's sake? At the very least enough so that the doors to a slightly bigger audience are left ajar.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

One of the Towers Of London was special guest judge on the Lipton Ice Tea® Air Guitar stage at Readngt this year.

Says it all, really.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I like this writer. You're my hero for the day.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

http://www.towersoflondon.net/images/steps_in-_manchester.jpg

no words...
just...no words...

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

the secret machines were vaguely impressive at reading.

sadly at the barfly late last year they were just vague.

xxx

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Ha ha. Funny. Can't agree with you about Secret Machines, mind, but this is the sort of writing I like anyway.

I've heard so much hatred regarding Towers of London, part of me wants to see them. And I have tickets for The Bravery out of curiosity. I did the same with Jet when they first appeared... leading to some great reverse indie snobbery, because I can say to people 'I thought they were shit before you did'...

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

This is good stuff. Plenty of spite. That said, the Secret Machines album does have a couple of good songs on it, dispite sounding like an overproduced Pink Floyd in parts.

Btw, were Towers of London formerly known as The Turrets,
or is my aged memory playing tricks on me?

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

ahaha the thrilss shape of those boys
ballbags the lot of them
who gives a fuck what happened to corey haim?
who in christ is corey haim

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

He was in The Lost Boys. Clearly, you'd make a rubbish goth!

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000433/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnxteD0yMHxzZz0xfGxtPTIwMHx0dD1vbnxwbj0wfHE9Y29yZXkgaGFpbXxodG1sPTF8bm09b24_;fc=1;ft=14;fm=1

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Awww, it's like The Cooper Temple Clause had babies with '87-era Guns N Roses!

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

aye....cheers

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

You never even mentioned the dullness that is the Subways here.
It's like the Von Bondies but worse and the Von Bondies wern't that great anyway.
Got some signed stuff from them, I'll take your e-bay advice.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

the more press DIS gives Towers Of London, the more people want to see them.
ironic, no?

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

No.
*guffffawwwwwww*

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Apparently Bloc Party are the sound of 2005, according to the front of NME today. Having not heard them, should I be my usual skeptical self? Add The Departure to your list.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

the NME is correct in this instance.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I thought Bloc Party were the sound of 1981?

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Athlete are awful (remember El Salvador?) but the Bravery's single which I heard is good. People go on a lot about bands rehashing styles and eras, but considering all music over the last fifteen years since and including grunge has been a rehash of earlier works, music fans should listen to what they like from new bands. Yes Interpol may be Joy Division mark 2 in many people's eyes, but it's still great music in my opinion; and DiS's given the result of the poll for best album of 2004.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I wanted to like them, you know, just to be difficult, and then you put that picture up, and now i hate them, specifically the guys on either end........and the one in the middle.


.......then i noticed one had a 'mum' bag and the other one has a scabby bandage......

I hate them all now.

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Har, this is the best piece I've read on DiS since I read the same author's fantastic (and accurate) Bell X1 review. You, Sir/Madam/It, are my new hero

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

looks like a fucking awful 'grease' tribute band

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

don't encourage him. his ego is big enough as it is.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

It inflates with all the booze.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

they do remind me a lot of a certain ratio, and thats very 1981 indeed. Try this if ya like - there's about 14 tracks to download there.
http://www.blocparty.net/mp3.html

Towers of London? Christ, how pathetic. 1987 was a long time ago, I remember it first time round, and it was sad then.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

They're sat on the fountain outside the Town Hall.

There's Rod Stewart, there's Steve Adler, there's a spotty twat with a big nose, and they're all sat like girls.

How very rock 'n' roll.

Cheerio,

Ian

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

The Kaiser Chiefs! What a joke!

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Fancy seeing you here Graham! Where did you find that link? :-)

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Ta for the link. I will indeed download!

You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Great Article

:)

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

i've got some words:
ugliest band EVER.they're a five piece but it's like they've got three drummers.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

love the article!!!

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Please all of you get over Bloc Party - if they are the best for 2005 then Im stopping listening to music I'd put The OThers above them that's how bad they are!

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005


Superb. The Bravery are a pile of toss - glad someone else spotted that.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

This article represents the worst kind of indie elitism. Grow up, you're not in a fucking playground. Why is this site so centred around what's bad? If you don't like it, don't fucking waste your time writing about it, tell us something you do like so maybe we'll check it out and discover some great new music. Or alternitively, just bitch.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I think this is the best thing I have ever read on Drowned in Sound. Writer, whoever you are, you are a genius. More bile please!

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

err, dissent is important actually. it's time to realise that a lot of 'exciting' 'new' music around at the moment consists of cynically rehashed sounds from 20 years ago, repackaged to appear original and hyped to fuck. there's a lot of shit out there and there's no harm in drawing attention to it, seeing as a lot of bands get success on the back of the public swallowing the hype that gets spread about them. it's as important to knock these bands down as it is to discover new music - because as 'septic clit' noted, there's only ever room for a handful of over-promoted new bands which means other new bands who might actually be good get overlooked.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I disagree I think The Bravery are quite possibly the most important people to ever grace the face of the earth. Along with disagreing I also like to lie.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

What a brilliant article! Totally agree with Towers of London but I think the Others should have been top of the list. I cannot, for the life of me, understand what is good about them.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

that picture of them is hillarius they look well cool dude lol

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Well, yet again DiS is awash with the very lowest quality jounalism, well done. As someone else has commented, how about actually extolling the virtues of music you actually think is good? I know its not as exciting to you as slating bands you don't like but in the long run its more productive isn't it.

Im sure The Others and Towers of London et al will thank you once again for the free publicity and getting people to keep talking about them, which, if im not mistaken is the polar opposite of what you'd like to happen.

GrahamBreed - Your quite correct, 1987 was a long time ago, 17 years in fact, and if your profile is correct that means you were the grand old age of 11 way back then. Now i could be wrong but at that age we don't have a grip on whethere things are truely 'sad' or not do we, and your no exception. (and no, im not wrong)

Any way, once again, thanks DiS for such abysmal and poorly focused journalism with no impartiality whatsoever. By the Way, Septic Clit, your not related to the nausiatingly talentless Gary Guestlist are you or perhaps (perish the thought) his nom de plume?

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

It's Sean Adams, surely

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I think Mr Babbit, that you've missed the point with your argument. DiS does spend most of its time bigging up things that we think are ace, but saying that precious little other media offers views on what's not great, it's hardly the end of the world for us to publish an article highlighting those things IN ONE PERSON'S OPINION. Most people say that DiS is too positive about most of the things that we review.. catch 22...

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Now come on Gareth, you know that a great deal of the stuff that goes up is really negative (on the boards especially). I don't really think this is a bad thing though- at least people can be passionate here. Products like the NME are constantly pushing what's new for the sake of it. However, I think comments such as 'bloc party rip-off gang of four' are just silly because they desperately focus in on one or two songs in search of references and/or as a way to continue a personal policy of indie-elitism. Please don't let this become another bloc party stream, mind.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I just posted a review of Towers Of Londons new single to my editor. It used the word "clusterfucks".
Any odds on it being printed?

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Saw Towers of London last year supporting Campag Velocet, i remember them as "interesting" to look at, dont recall the music. They are now playing Northampton Soundhaus next friday and Im gonna go now because of this thread. Make my own mind up.

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Saw Towers of London last year supporting Campag Velocet, i remember them as "interesting" to look at, dont recall the music. They are now playing Northampton Soundhaus next friday and Im gonna go now because of this thread. Make my own mind up.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

is that actually how you pronounce kasabian?

secret machines aren't shit! fair enough, the broadsheets like 'em, but they're hardly amy winehouse, or brmc for that matter. spot on with the rest though, i like the killers but the bravery are so derivative its comical.

and london is spewing out some awful awful music at the mo(thee unstrung, others, tol, neils children etc), to the point where it puts me off new bands if i see thats where they hail from. im not surprised everyones creaming over bloc party (who are rather good) given the competition.

Re: You’re in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

They're the sound of Hype.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Hey Septic tank, i bet you wish you could get down and dirty with the those sexy, mouthy, saviours of rock KASABIAN. I bet you'd give anything to get in the sack with them on their tour bus, does not the thought of Serge's long hair on your septic crotch send you delirious...kiss their feet.

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Are you Spider from the 'Micro Machines' videogames?

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

No-one will read this message probably... sigh. well, just wanted to say stop whinging people like charlie babbit, even if the author is just bitching its still productive. it brings these bands to our attention and lets us decide for ourselves - who gives a fuck if its indie elitism or whatever. surely, by making us aware of how bad these bands may or may not be, he/she is only enhancing our own views on what good and bad music are? would you want a world where only bands you liked were discussed? isnt discussion like this healthy?

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

I always played as Mike.
Who, as it would happen, looks a bit like me.
How odd.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

i believe dis is now interesting again. maybe it's cyclical. i love bon jovi. I WANNA LAY YOU DOWN ON A BED OF ROSES!!

Re: You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

i wanna be just as close as, the holy ghost is. brilliant.

You're in Nation: What Not to Watch 2005

Erm, Kasabian are from Leicester.

Add your comment

Reply


 or Abandon