taTu - Dangerous and Moving

Since when has Franz Ferdinand been *pretending* to be gay? I always just assumed they were unabashedly British.

As always, any disagreements I might have with Dom are rendered irrelevant by casually tossed-off nuggets of awesome like "If Tony Soprano was two nubile Russian chicks, this is the kind of song he'd be writing."

So Franz Ferdinand aren't as good at "fauxmosexuality" as taTu. I think we can all agree that these are the issues that are important not just to Stylus readers, but to the entire music community. Give me a fucking break. At least FF can write and play their own goddamn music. And yes, I can say that without the slightest trace of an elitist rockist sneer on my face. What's more important, fake gayness or fake musicianship? You decide. While you're thinking about that, also ponder while reviews of dreck like this goes up right away, but Stylus still won't review My Morning Jacket's superb new record. Oh well, they'd just give it a C- minus anyway, just to be contrarian, kind of like what they did with... Franz Ferdinand. Oh well. Let taTu go on faking their sapphic lust. Just as long as I can keep pretending to give a fuck.

And the rockist backlash begins... *evil laugh*

Gnarles- do you agree than Maroon 5 are a lot more talented than Johnny Cash?

gnarles: 1. No, you can't say that without a rockist sneer, as you've just shown. 2. I'm working on the MMJ review, dammit - I only got the promo yesterday. I wouldn't say "superb".

Sorry, but just because I think taTu are crap and think that Franz Ferdinand are good doesn't make me a rockist. I like plenty of non-white-guys-with-guitars stuff. I just don't like phony bitches, or I would have stayed in high school. As for you not thinking MMJ isn't superb, well... maybe you're right after all. But it's a hell of lot better than this silly dross.

Oh, and Dom: While I do not think that Maroon 5 are more talented than Johnny Cash, I must say that Adam Levine's arms appear to be much hairier.

B-B-B-B-B-ut Johnny Cash didn't write his own songs, and Maroon 5 do! Thus by your logic, the latter must be better! This is the thing, you shouldn't apply grand meta-narratives to explain why you like one band and not another.

meow! cat fight! keep it on the album girls.

"B-B-B-B-B-ut Johnny Cash didn't write his own songs" Um, what?

Didn't write *all* his songs. Ie, 14 of the 21 tracks on Live At San Quentin were written by someone else, 13 of the 19 on Folsom, his two biggest hits ("Ring of Fire" and "Boy Named Sue" were written by someone else), not to mention his Lollapaloza karaoke of latter years etc etc etc.

Right but I still have a few issues with that. A. Even though they were his most popular albums, I don't think you can really consider the ratio of covers:originals on the live albums to be representative of his recorded output in general. B. It's not like he made his career solely off of performing other people's songs; most of his early hits ("Cry Cry Cry", "I Walk The Line", "Folsom Prison Blues") were self-penned, and I would argue that covers and traditional songs are significantly different from songs penned for the artist by someone else (not that there's anything wrong with the latter; I can't even understand why I'm in this debate, honestly).

Same reason the rest of us are: we're suckers for punishment. Anyway, I shall now go back to retaining a stoic silence on all of my reviews.

Hold on, I need to test something.
Hope this works.

Fantastic.
WRITING OWN SONGS =/= GOOD
PROOF: EMO

That having been said, tATu's continued existence and artistic praise leveled at them baffle me. Just because it's polished pop does not mean it's incredi-awesome!

A+++++ great writer would roffle again!

come on, there's room for everyone.

Why is it that medicore pop rock acts are favored by the indie scene? and indie rock favorites that veer to a more pop sound are snobbed? and it takes three paragraphs of an article to get to the music portion of a review? If I wanted to read reviews like that, I'd go to p-fork.

Haven't people caught on yet that this place is a hell of a lot more snobby, elitist and ironically contradictory than Pitchfork ever was? But because of aforementioned traits the writers still consider themselves morally superior, eventhough that leads them down a path of misguided hypocrisy and terrible, terrible reviews.

now that the OC soundtrack has all the good 'indie' bands, we 'indie' kids must pretend to like crap-pop and hope the next OC soundtrack features Tatu instead of Kasabian.

I've seen a lot of bashing of t.A.T.u, too. I don't like them, but I'll praise the reviewer for liking a poppy act when so many are unfairly criticized. Same with Stylus's brave Liz Phair review.

these comments sure are fun. and this album is good. it deserved an A. And if you have a problem with people liking music that doesn't fit your world view or the taste of your cool indie friends, then go to some snobbish indie board, thx. who cares about "indie" and "mainstream" anyways anymore?

I have yet to listen to this album, but I'll freely admit to owning their debut album and getting more than a handful of spins out of it. I'm sure I'd listen to it eventually but that's really not why I'm posting a comment here. I like you and want to have your babies, Dom, just for this: "If Tony Soprano was two nubile Russian chicks, this is the kind of song he'd be writing." Okay, just kidding about the babies part. Scandalous!