This album really disappointed me. On my first exposure, they looked pretty promising on Saturday Night Live a couple of weeks ago. Indeed, it looks like they now have a hit album brewing in the wake of that performance.
"Looked" pretty promising was unfortunately what it was, though. They sound like nothing. Not "they sound like nothing else," but that they don't sound like anything. There's little or nothing distinctive about this group. They made a slick, emotionless hard rock pop album. The only emotional impact the album had on me was some hint of amusement that such a crass bit of impersonal manufactured corporate product would contain a song claiming, "It's indie rock and roll for me."
They don't even particularly sound like they're copying some identifiable influence. For some kind of comparison, they might be likened unto a bad Cure record, or maybe generic Creed. Folks, if your record sounds generic compared to Creed, you're getting pretty far down the food chain.
Being generous, you could claim that most of these songs have melodies. As my brother said on watching their SNL performance, I've heard worse. Compared to some ignorant trash metal or crappy hip hop, this stuff might look pretty tuneful.
But these compositions are mediocre at best. They have weak melodies. They have very minimal in the way of anything actually catchy going on here. None of these songs have memorable tunes. They all sound just exactly alike. Indeed, I couldn't pick out which ones they played on SNL. Might have been any of them. I defy you to sing back a line or two from any of these songs an hour after hearing the album.
I wanted to recommend one of the songs that almost sounded catchy as I was listening to it maybe just twenty minutes ago, just for something to sample if you think you're interested in this. However, looking back over the song titles I couldn't even pick out the title. Never mind.
I do note that some song called "Mr Brightside" seems to be a big current hit on Billboard's Modern Rock chart. I see that there is a song by that title listed in playlist window that I just listened to.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Tim Hall
I'm taking the fact that this band are being hyped to death by the British music press as evidence of their inherent suckosity.
The British music press, always the enemies of good music, love to hype any band that lacks the talent or depth to be anything other than one-hit-wonders. So that they'll safely fade away to make room for whatever equivalent one hit wonder they hype next week.
2 - Greg Smyth
What sells in Britain, doesn't necessarily go in the US. While I don't greatly love the Killers album (it's reasonable pop-punk fare) they're likely to consistently do well in the UK. Whether they've got longevity in the states is another question altogether...
3 - Tom
Well, thank God, I thought maybe I was the only one for whom this band registered a far-too-strong "been there, heard that better many other times" reaction in me. I file this one lower than another band that garners just about the same reaction from me: Franz Ferdinand. About the only new bands raping the early 80s' post-punk/pre-newwave sound that have managed to get a good reaction out of me are the Futureheads and Dogs Die In Hot Cars, probably because they're both stealing out of the same honey pots that I love - early 80s XTC and Talking Heads. Original? Not a bit. Fun? Hell yes.
4 - Jim Carruthers
When I saw them on SNL, I thought they were the generic "skinny-tie new wave band" low budget movie producers use when they can't pay royalties or can't figure out how to compose something original.
So is this just a good example of diminishing returns -- the New Wave of New, New Wave?
5 - anonymous
Really? I sort of like them. Their melodies are VERY strong, just delicious synth-pop. I know there's not a lot of substance in it, but they're only new...
Honestly I feel bad that the backlash is starting already for them; I guess that's the downside of getting some hype and exposure. I think they've got a lot of talent, and I'm definitely catching a show next time they come to the States.
But that's just me...
6 - Al Barger
Damn Jim, that's cold- but they pretty much deserve it. Good one.
7 - Jim Carruthers
I mostly tuned into that ep of SNL for Jennifer Garner, but she now totally looks like a guy. Not cute at all.
8 - Al Barger
Really? If I find a guy that looks like that, I'll consider going to bat for the other team.
9 - Jim Carruthers
So, Al, you're admitting you didn't really watch that ep of SNL? JG was supposed to host, but she has been fucked up by exposure to Ben Affleck, so the pitch-hitting host was Topher Grace, who, you might have mistaken for a winsome girl.
And if you did, go to the penalty box and feel three minutes of shame.
10 - Al Barger
That would explain. I wouldn't know either one by name or work. I just remember a good looking girl being there.
11 - mrbenning
I've decided that The Killers' Hot Fuss is an example of genius engineering in the studio. Whoever mixed it should be applauded as most of it is fantastic and it's got a fairly unique sound giving identity to a band that could have easily been looked over (going back to the another "skinny-tie new wave band" assessment).
Their live show, from what I've seen on television performances, lacks any audience connection whatsoever. They're all stiff on stage and play through the album tracks note for note. They're obviously not the brains behind that operation.
I guess I like Hot Fuss, but dislike The Killers, if that makes any sense.
12 - HW Saxton
Aaaagh! Enough about these guys already!
The Killers are from Vegas (indirectly),
my present home.No one here on the local
scene could believe it when these guys
started making waves internationally on
the UK pop charts.They never had much of a local fanbase or drew particularly
good crowds.There are waaay better local
bands in LasVegas.
I've seen them a few times in local bars
and thought they were awful.They looked
like some silly Tribute To The 80's band
and sounded the part as well. Carruthers
hit the nail on the head w/ the skinny
tie remark,as these guys were on The O.C
recently playing just that kind of part.
Their live shows are soooo weak as they
have almost no stage presence to speak
of. Their tunes are un-memorable and
boring. They're just bad enough to make
it big on a college rock/MTV late night
level but not quite mediocre enough to
really make it huge. I'd give them about
a year or so and they'll be history.
13 - Mroz
"They sound like nothing." Are you litening to a RIAA corrupted bootleg? If that's your response to an album, you should seriously be banned from writing music reviews.
"...you could claim that most of these songs have melodies", you said. Just look at the single "Somebody Told Me". There are very few songs with a stronger, catchier, pop driven melody. It may not be a complex chord progression, but I think chomplex chord progressions in Pop Music died out with Queen.
Aside from the chord progressions in their "emotionless" songs, they have alot of depth to them. Thats part of what gives them their New Wave sound. The fact that you compare them to a "...generic Creed" demonstrates your lack of music knowlege and comprehension. Creed has been marked as a Pearl Jam rip off. Neither of those bands are in any way comparible to a New Wave band, which The Killers most definatly are. I can't imagine what you define as "crappy hip-hop" (Celine Dion???) or "ignorant trash metal" (possibly Beck???).
It's a shame you judge a good piece of music on how catchy it is, or whether you can remember the title of the song. Just because a band didn't name the song after the lyrics in the hook (which The Killers actually did do) doesn't mean that the song is immediatly bad. They are artists, give them some artistic license to name the songs what they would like.
You have a right to give an artist a bad review if you feel that it is deserving. But you also have the responsibility to verify your complaints and show just cause that this bad review is deserving. You did nothing more than say the music was "nothing" and compared it to bands not even in the same genre. You provided not one bit of valid musical reference and you failed to demonstrate any valuable music knowledge to give us a reason to respect your opinion.
This band may be overhyped, but I've always firmly believed that if there are rave reviews for a record, there is probably somthing worth listening to.
I'm a strong believer in judging an artist by listening to the whole album, but if you are only looking to sample the The Killer's Hot Fuss, check out Mr. Brightside and Somebody Told Me. They are two Pop New Wave hits that work as well today as they would have in the early 80's.
Somebody give me a blogging position here before the Blog Critic's Music readers lose all cognitive fuction.
-MROZ
14 - Al Barger
First off MROZ, as to "give me a blogging position here" - Drop Eric Olsen an email. He will likely be happy to accomodate you, at which point I would be happy to see your own counter-review.
As to making comparisons out of genre, that's not especially clear cut. "New wave" has very little real meaning as to describing actual music. Plus, the Killers are so generic that it's a little difficult for me to assign any genre. Creed and the Killers are both indistinguished loud guitar rock.
If they had anything artistically significant to say, I'd be remembering it, but they just don't. They aren't memorable in any signifcant way, and they will be utterly forgotten this time next year in all likelihood.
Some folks are obviously more entertained by this product than I am, and that's... ok, as Stuart Smalley might say. However, I have to question the musical judgement of anyone who thinks they are finding "depth" in this utter mediocrity.
Basically, this band is Cheez Whiz, yucky tasting processed music food. If you're really hungry for rock and roll, and there are no real records available, then this might tide you over until supper.
Personally, I'd rather go hungry and save my appetite.
15 - Mroz
"New wave has very little real meaning as to describing actual music." -Al Barger
"New Wave: A style of rock music popularized in the early 1980s, marked by the use of synthesizers." -Dictionary.com
Sorry to confuse you. I was refering to the widly accepted genre of new wave. It's a distinct sound and The Killer's record is filled with that driving synthesized sound. Creed on the other hand is more Alternative Guitar Rock. The Killers base their songs around driving sythesized "NEW WAVE" sounds, while creed bases their songs around solo guitar riffs. If you really feel that Creed and the Killers both have the same sound, you proved once again thay you lack music knowledge and that you shouldn't be spreading your opinion on it.
"Some folks are obviously more entertained by this product than I am." Obviously. I'm not saying you need to like it. Thats your own opinion. I just feel that not only is your reviewing ability poor, you also seem to have no musical experience or knoweldge to even attempt to write a read-worthy review.
You prove this in your last point. "Basically, this band is Cheez Whiz, yucky tasting processed music food." I really don't even know what that means. You're comparing a band to food? The only similarity is that both are processed. And they both use different meanings of the word.
At this point I was so baffled by your post I decided to check out your other reviews. I wasn't suprised what I saw. More proof of your inability to properly write a review... infact... properly write anything refering to music.
Three more awful musical judgment calls:
1. The complete ripping of U2's new album as well as any musical work they have done since 1991.
2. The comparing of Elvis Presley to Elvis Costello. (ARE YOU SERIOUS? They are two completely different musicians in two uncomparible genre's. What kind of moron compares two musicians based on a first name? Presley, Costello, and any other music man with any common sense would agree that this article is awful.)
3. (and this is the worst) You have a top 20 records of 2004 list that takes 20 songs off of 8 albums. You couldn't make the list a little more diverse? No one besides yourself could ever pick these songs. I did like the Loretta Lynn album, but I would never pick 4 songs off of this album to be in the top 20 of the year. It almost seems like you listen to 12 albums, give 4 bad reviews and make the rest the best of the year.
Please do us all a favor and stop posting. It would be a shame if someone read your reviews and mistakenly believed they were well thoughtout, valid statements about music.
What in the world was that 1% of Indiana thinking?
-Mroz
16 - Eric Olsen
new wave all the way, which makes them yet another recycling, but who isn't? I saw the SNL gig and thought the first song, the hit, deserves to be a hit because it is catchy as a mofo but also because it brought the band alive: hits do that to their makers. The second song was about four levels down and Iwould guess closer to the band's "true" level: look how many new wave bands were one-hit wonders, from Modern English to Toni Basil
17 - Tom Johnson
Mroz: "Somebody Told Me". There are very few songs with a stronger, catchier, pop driven melody.
Seriously? Seriously, ever? This, of all songs ever written, has one of the strongest, catchiest pop-driven melodies? Ever.
And Al's right - the term "new wave" means very little, and your definition does little to help your case against him. ". . . marked by the use of synthesizers. . . ." doesn't really say much of anything, does it? That's like saying heavy metal is a style of music marked by the use of guitars.
As for your "three musical judgement calls":
1. I didn't agree with his assessment in every aspect he addressed, but at least Al laid out his argument in a well thought-out manner. The nice thing with a good critic is that if he disagrees with the pedestal an artist has been put on, he can make an intelligent argument as to why.
2. Costello vs. Presley was for fun and entertainment - you know, a fun little diversion in the "what if" vein. Lighten up.
3. If Al's 20 favorite songs were from 8 albums, so what? Unless he imposes a rule on himself of only one song from each artist/album, how is anything about his list wrong? And so what if "no one besides [Al] could ever pick these songs"? Again, the critical reasoning and judgement was sound as to why he picked what he picked. "It almost seems like you listen to 12 albums, give 4 bad reviews and make the rest the best of the year." Well, I think that's pretty easy to answer: Al, like most of us here, buys what he knows he's likely going to at least enjoy, thereby ensuring that much of what he reviews gets at least some positive response.
Whenever someone criticizes a critic, I suggest they step up to bat and take a shot themselves. Eric's pretty open to who gets to post here, so why not enlighten us with your wisdom, Mroz?
18 - Dawn
I really like Modern English, thank you very much. And one hit wonder or not, that song has spanned the test of time.
19 - Eric Olsen
yes, the song has, I didn't mean it as a slight
20 - Mroz
Honestly, if you feel that "New Wave" has no meaning, you are also lacking in your musical knowledge. Let's have a little test...
Led Zepplin- NOT NEW WAVE
The Cars- NEW WAVE
Crosby Stills and Nash- NOT NEW WAVE
Tears for Fears- NEW WAVE
I can go on and on defining bands that are considered New Wave, not just by me, but the large majority of the music world.
I understand that these reviews are people's opinions, and they are welcome to them. But when writing a review, you have a responsibility to your readership. Can you imagine what would become of Blog Critic if a writer just started pumping out useless comparisons and bogus best of lists. What if I wrote an article a day comparing Eminem to members of the rock and roll hall of fame based on their ability to rhyme? What if I wrote an article on the best 20 songs off of Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band? What does this provide to the community that reads the review looking for some sort of insite? If you want a chance to rant on nosense, maybe Blog Critic isn't the right place for you. Get your own blog.
Saying a song's depth is based on its melody and saying a song is bad because you couldn't remember the hook are both horribly inaccurate ways of judging a piece of music. Not to mention comparing music to a food product which is just insane.
Al feels that Creed and the Killers sound the same. Can anyone agree with that? The bands are so unique from each other. Their music structure is different, their chord progressions are different, even their sound and instrument choices are different.
You may not like either band very much, but you have to respect their abilities to write a pop song, and accept the fact that they sound nothing alike.
-Mroz
21 - Eric Olsen
Creed is post-grunge and very derivative of Pearl jam, for example; the Killers are early-'80s new wave all the way: I hear the Knack, Joe Jackson and Devo, among countless lesser others
22 - Dawn
To be completely honest, I like the Killers, and mainly for the reasons that they are being vilified: new wave derivitives.
I mean let's face it, has any music before or after New Wave been as eclectic, interesting and ranging in depth and emotion as much as the entire genre of New Wave, that includes acts as diverse as Joy Division to Lloyd Cole?
You will have a hard time telling me there has.
But then again, I am an 80's person who had enough sense and taste to avoid hair metal and Top 40 from the moment I could make a choice.
23 - The Theory
Al... thanks for your review. Their SNL performance sparked my interest, but you've pretty much convinced me to NOT BOTHER.
And I totally support your comparisson to Creed. I use the Creed comparisson a lot to bands that sound nothing like them because of the IDEA behind them... tasteless, generic, half-assed crap.
24 - michelle poole
I don't think The Killers sound like Creed, but I guess there's a comparison there in their respective un-originality.
When I first heard them I thought they sounded like Duran-Duran. And I like Duran-Duran as much as the next guy, but I don't need another Duran-Duran, ya know?
That was alot of "Durans."
They're ok, I think they have a pop presence, but no staying power. I also saw them perform live and thought they were terrible. I was sorry for people that paid money to go see them.
25 - Jim Carruthers
Just for Shitz 'n' Giggles (you remember their hit single, right?) I pulled out my first edition copy of "The New Music" by Glenn A. Baker and Stuart Coupe, which provides an overview of "new wave" circa 1980. Here's their list of "New Wave" bands they are tipping to make it big in the upcoming decade:
Nervus Rex / The Elevators / The Mo-dettes / The Korgis / Willie Nile / The Inmates / The Skids / Fingerprintz / The Ruts / The Undertones / Bruce Woolley / Jules & The Polar Bears / Robin Lane & The Chartbusters / Joan Jett / The A's / John Hiatt / The Models / U.K. Subs / The Roches / Moon Martin / The Sinceros / The Scooters / Tommy Tutone / Martha & the Muffins
So, when you're praising what is essentially a marketing category for a commodity like "The Killers", remember, this too, shall pass.