IMAGI-BLOG
Greatest Pitchfork Review Ever?
Submitted by Imaginary Shrie on February 1, 2008.This might be my all-time favorite Pitchfork review. I already dislike this band immensely so this is just another feather in my Louis XIV-hating cap. Love to the Fork for this one:
"Psst, I don't know if anyone knows this yet-- it may not even be on Wikipedia-- but Louis XIV love to fuck, and apparently they often do so. Just listen to their music. Or read their lyrics. Or look at their album art, watch their videos, play their records in reverse, expose their press releases to an ultraviolet light source, or-- well, you get the point. Oh yeah, they also occasionally play rock'n'roll, which I hear is this style of music with an accentuated backbeat or whatever, but that's only to receive inspiration to fuck more. So now that that cat's out of the bag, we turn to follow-up Slick Dogs and Ponies, where apparently the sex sometimes goes bad, or at least grew boring enough to force our lotharios into trying new tricks.
While I hesitate to call Slick Dogs's night vision sex tape cover "deep" or "poetic," following their debut's asscrack-on-bathroom-tile smut, it looks like a freakin' Van Gogh. Fittingly, Louis XIV try pretty hard to pass as artists here, as opposed to distilling classic rock libido into something you can simply inject in your ass. Frontman Jason Hill expresses some pathos here, a tad more profound than the pain of getting an erection while wearing tight jeans, but not far off. For an even crazier conceit, the band decides to actually work for their self-appointed sex symbol status, whether via Electric Six-style stabs at lunkheaded disco or big, dumb, ultra-schmaltzy morning-after ballads.
Single "Air Traffic Control" gets some sleazy mileage out of the aviation metaphor ("Well you were high when I met you"), but overall the track sounds like an unironic plea for help, especially when Brian Karscig's chirpy vocals kick in: "Air traffic control/ I've been gone, I've been up away from home/ Now my gear is down, I'm circling round, and I am coming in." The hushed psychotic thriller "Stalker", a surprisingly subtle, clever song, almost encroaches on Gorillaz territory, with Hill doing a pretty spot-on Damon Albarn impression. Of course, the band hasn't been properly neutered, and they're up to their old shenanigans on piss-drunk stompers like "Misguided Sheep" or "Guilt By Association", the latter announcing, basically, that they're scandalous enough to implicate anyone of breaking the law who's in close proximity to them.
Sadly, while Wal-Mart and Christian censor groups will bristle at these obscene sounds and images, there's really nothing uniquely shocking about Louis XIV, just disgusting or, even worse, plain dull. If they really wanted to ruffle feathers, they'd be championing ideas like "global warming is a myth," not graphic but predictable sex romps or even the half-assed Iraq War rants on "Free Won't Be What It Used to Be" ("March out, soldier, the bugle calls"). The sentimental dimension of Slick Dogs only further depicts Louis XIV as an embodiment of everything American audiences just never "got" about glam rock. They're dazzled by the hedonistic aspects of the genre-- the (heterosexual) sex, the drugs, the big guitars-- but completely overlook the more complicated nuances. There are no sci-fi or fantasy themes explored here, and certainly no gender-bending. Instead, the slightly more dynamic Louis XIV only give you testosterone-fueled rock at its least appealing extremes: heedless lust or, arguably even more repulsive, cheesy balladry.
-Adam Moerder, February 01, 2008
2
Imaginary Shrie said on February 1, 2008:
Well, I think I'll pass on that show altogether. I just loved this review. I'm glad some people still have the balls to call it like they see it.
» reply
3
Erik Gonzalez said on February 2, 2008:
Isn't "Greatest Pitchfork Review" a contradiction in terms? I just kind of think it sounds like an out of work English major, but hey, who am I to talk anyway ...
» reply
4
Imaginary Shrie said on February 2, 2008:
Out of work English major? No... I wasn't an English major and I'm definitely not out of work.
Thanks for the criticism though. Pardon me if I don't consider it constructive.
» reply
5
Imaginary Shrie said on February 2, 2008:
Out of work English major? No... I wasn't an English major and I'm definitely not out of work.
Thanks for the criticism though. Pardon me if I don't consider it constructive.
» reply
7
ChrisB said on February 2, 2008:
"I'm glad some people still have the balls to call it like they see it."
I don't see what is so ballsy about this review, or even what makes it particularly good. I've read dozens of reviews of Louis XIV (who I can't get into despite numerous attempts) and I don't really recall reading one positive review. Saying Louis XIV are juvenile and sexist is hardly earth-shattering.
Instead it looks like quite a few insults strung together about a band you don't care for. It doesn't challenge anything I've previously thought of the band nor did I learn anything about the band or criticism itself from it.
I'm sure that Erik @ 3 was referring to Mr. Moerder as "an out of work English major." This isn't the first time a P4K reviewer has fallen in love with their own verbiage.
» reply
8
Imaginary Shrie said on February 2, 2008:
Hey... you know I just thought it was a funny review, honestly written about a band that the author doesn't like. I thought it was a bit out of character from the normal review I find on there, so I thought it might be worth mentioning. It's quite entertaining as well, so shoot me.
I'm not a general fan of P4K so I agree with you on that front.
» reply
9
Imaginary Kiku said on February 2, 2008:
Personally I think pitchforks greatest review ever was their comprehensive review of music. I think it got a 6.8
» reply
10
randy said on February 2, 2008:
"Now music's a 6.8, at best. I may never listen to music again!"
» reply
11
Erik Gonzalez said on February 2, 2008:
Shrie: I'm talking the P4K review, not you! I'm sure you're not out of work English major! Sorry about my confusion (I definitely wasn't an English major).
» reply
12
The Grim said on February 3, 2008:
This is mildly humorous, but, like ChrisB said, it doesn't really say much about the album other than it's not cool.
In a broader bitch-fest, ever notice that the ONLY time p4k runs something like this is when it's taking easy shots at a band everybody already hates? I mean, come on, you're not rocking the boat by making fun of Louis XIV or doing a video of a monkey drinking its pee in lieu of a real review for a Jet album or whatever that was. Anything that could be remotely "controversial" or whatever just gets a middly-piddly lukewarm review instead of going all the way and taking the risk to say it sucks. The last real surprise review I remember is that 0.0 for Travis Morrison.
» reply
13
Imaginary Shrie said on February 4, 2008:
Eh... I still appreciate the review and think it's humourous/somewhat true. So all of you, jog on! (to quote one of my fave newish movies "Hot Fuzz")
» reply
14
Tiffany said on February 4, 2008:
Granted, a scathing review. But I think Pitchfork's review of Louis XIV's debut album gets much more to the point:
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/19591-the-best-little-secrets-are-kept
» reply
16
Steve said on February 15, 2008:
Louis xiv could have released a masterpiece and Pitchfork
would have slamed it! It is Personal. So much for objectivity. I rather like these guys. This band has balls! Long Live Rock!
» reply
Reviews
randy said on February 1, 2008:
Yeah, they're pretty uninteresting. Unfortunately you have to put up with them if you want to see the headliner close to the stage, as in, this upcoming Monday, when they open for Hot Hot Heat and The Editors.