Date: Feb 16, 1985
Weeks: 3
I had forgotten about this song. When I started it up, I immediately recognized it. "Hey, it's that cheesy saxophone riff that gets used a lot when a sexy scene is being played for laughs." Then I realized that reaction probably wouldn't work in the song's favor.
Everything about this song is so desperate to be sincere, but it's hard to take it seriously when I have to dig through layers of dated 80s-specific cheese. The saxophone. The whispery, echoing background vocals. The overly passionate, yet insincere lead singing. Synthesized keyboard stings. All terrible tropes of soft rock in the 80s that feel really dated now.
I suppose the drum, bass, and guitar lines aren't so bad. If you put them under a different song, maybe they'd be fine. But the song leaves me with the overall impression that it's trying to be sexy, but it really doesn't succeed.
And then the lyrics. This is a "sorry I cheated on you" song. "I'm never gonna dance again, guilty feet have got no rhythm." "I should have known better than to cheat a friend." Basic stuff, I suppose, but there's something else here. First there's the bridge that says "Now who's gonna dance with me. Please stay." Then the overall (attempted) sexy tone of the music. This isn't a "sorry I cheated on you, I feel bad about it, goodbye" song. This is a "sorry I cheated on you, but if you walk away, you're the one giving up on a good relationship" song. It's got it's sentiment in entirely the wrong place. It's one thing to try to be a "sorry I cheated on you, please forgive me and give me another chance" song. But this song fails to even use the words "sorry" or "forgive." Nope, this is the kind of song a shallow inconsiderate person uses to try to seduce their ex back after cheating on them.
My verdict: Don't like it. The sentiment implied by the lyrics is lousy, the music is dripping with the worst cheese of the 80s, and both George Michael and Wham have better songs than this.
Showing posts with label 1985. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1985. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Song #578: "Money For Nothing" by Dire Straits
Date: Sept 21, 1985
Weeks: 3
This is a classic of 80s rock, but it's probably best known for its music video. That is some early computer animation there, with its huge blocks, gliding movements, and barely-present shading. It's kind of funny that as I write this, I've got Finding Nemo on the TV. It's remarkable how far computer animation has come. This video also got played all over MTV, not least because it mentions MTV in the lyrics, creating a wonderful little cross-promotional synergy that both MTV and Dire Straits benefited from.
As for the actual song, the whole song is based around a great guitar riff. This is some plain and straightforward rock music here. The lead guitar carries the song, and everything else is secondary. There are synth-keyboards that are well-used as accents, and the drum line is unremarkably ordinary, which is a blessing in an 80s song.
The lyrics are pretty interesting. They are from the perspective of a very blue-collar guy who works delivering appliances, and he's envious that MTV stars have managed to figure out how to get paid a lot for doing very little actual work. "That's the way you do it. You play the guitar on the MTV." There's also some more colorful and offensive language in the lyrics that is also obviously from this character's perspective. As art, the offensive language is forgiven by the perspective, but as pop music it's a little rough to hear on the radio. Anyway, it's almost certainly accurate for the time.
My verdict: Like it. It's an 80s rock classic, and reminds me of MTV's best days.
Weeks: 3
This is a classic of 80s rock, but it's probably best known for its music video. That is some early computer animation there, with its huge blocks, gliding movements, and barely-present shading. It's kind of funny that as I write this, I've got Finding Nemo on the TV. It's remarkable how far computer animation has come. This video also got played all over MTV, not least because it mentions MTV in the lyrics, creating a wonderful little cross-promotional synergy that both MTV and Dire Straits benefited from.
As for the actual song, the whole song is based around a great guitar riff. This is some plain and straightforward rock music here. The lead guitar carries the song, and everything else is secondary. There are synth-keyboards that are well-used as accents, and the drum line is unremarkably ordinary, which is a blessing in an 80s song.
The lyrics are pretty interesting. They are from the perspective of a very blue-collar guy who works delivering appliances, and he's envious that MTV stars have managed to figure out how to get paid a lot for doing very little actual work. "That's the way you do it. You play the guitar on the MTV." There's also some more colorful and offensive language in the lyrics that is also obviously from this character's perspective. As art, the offensive language is forgiven by the perspective, but as pop music it's a little rough to hear on the radio. Anyway, it's almost certainly accurate for the time.
My verdict: Like it. It's an 80s rock classic, and reminds me of MTV's best days.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Song #585: "Separate Lives" by Phil Collins and Marilyn Martin
Date: Nov 30, 1985
Weeks: 1
After I reviewed "Say You, Say Me" (#587) by Lionel Richie, I was intrigued by the movie it was from. I thought it was odd that I'd never heard of it before. So I watched White Nights. It was an interesting movie, especially as a time capsule of the era it was from. Maybe there was a little too much dancing, and maybe the Soviet bad guys were a little too unsubtle, but the notion of setting a movie in a place and time where the sun never sets was an idea I'd never seen before, outside an episode of Northern Exposure. Anyway, I left feeling that the Lionel Richie song made a little bit of sense in the context of the movie. It's about two guys who feel alone, but find out they aren't that dissimilar.
This song, however, makes no sense in the context of the movie. This is clearly a breakup song, and no one in the movie has broken up. I suppose it may have some thematic similarities to Baryshnikov's character and his love interest (played by Helen Mirren), with the whole "you have no right to ask me how I feel" thing, but I don't recall it playing near their scenes. It played during a scene between Gregory Hines and Isabella Rossellini, and their relationship never went through anything like this. So it's an odd fit to this particular movie.
The overall theme is that two people have broken up, and they still care about each other a little, but they couldn't make their relationship work, so now they're trying to figure out how to be broken up and live their separate lives, when they still kind of want to be together. I suppose it's kind of an original idea for a song.
So after all that discussion of the subject matter, we get on to the music, which is generally pretty terrible. It's really slow, it's got that poundy 80s drum, it has a synthesized keyboard layered on top of a piano, as well as a string orchestra. It's a huge production for a pretty minimal song.
And the singers aren't very good. Phil Collins does a fine job making rock music most of the time, and he's got a decent voice for that, but he's not a particularly talented singer when it comes to singing over minimal music. I've never heard of Marilyn Martin in any other context, and I can sort of see why. She's not bad, but she pushes herself to sing bigger and louder than she really has the talent to support. They both come off sounding really whiny and angsty. And that's the problem. This isn't an "I want" song where somebody whines about what they want. This is supposed to be a song where two people are resigned to their breakup. It needs to be more restrained and sadder. Phil Collins is doing a better job at that, but they're both pretty wrong for this song.
My verdict: Don't like it. Here's Phil Collins performing this song with Laura Pausini and an acoustic guitar. It's a better song for having one better singer and simpler instrumentation. So this could be a better song if it weren't quite so mired in tropes of the 1980s.
Weeks: 1
After I reviewed "Say You, Say Me" (#587) by Lionel Richie, I was intrigued by the movie it was from. I thought it was odd that I'd never heard of it before. So I watched White Nights. It was an interesting movie, especially as a time capsule of the era it was from. Maybe there was a little too much dancing, and maybe the Soviet bad guys were a little too unsubtle, but the notion of setting a movie in a place and time where the sun never sets was an idea I'd never seen before, outside an episode of Northern Exposure. Anyway, I left feeling that the Lionel Richie song made a little bit of sense in the context of the movie. It's about two guys who feel alone, but find out they aren't that dissimilar.
This song, however, makes no sense in the context of the movie. This is clearly a breakup song, and no one in the movie has broken up. I suppose it may have some thematic similarities to Baryshnikov's character and his love interest (played by Helen Mirren), with the whole "you have no right to ask me how I feel" thing, but I don't recall it playing near their scenes. It played during a scene between Gregory Hines and Isabella Rossellini, and their relationship never went through anything like this. So it's an odd fit to this particular movie.
The overall theme is that two people have broken up, and they still care about each other a little, but they couldn't make their relationship work, so now they're trying to figure out how to be broken up and live their separate lives, when they still kind of want to be together. I suppose it's kind of an original idea for a song.
So after all that discussion of the subject matter, we get on to the music, which is generally pretty terrible. It's really slow, it's got that poundy 80s drum, it has a synthesized keyboard layered on top of a piano, as well as a string orchestra. It's a huge production for a pretty minimal song.
And the singers aren't very good. Phil Collins does a fine job making rock music most of the time, and he's got a decent voice for that, but he's not a particularly talented singer when it comes to singing over minimal music. I've never heard of Marilyn Martin in any other context, and I can sort of see why. She's not bad, but she pushes herself to sing bigger and louder than she really has the talent to support. They both come off sounding really whiny and angsty. And that's the problem. This isn't an "I want" song where somebody whines about what they want. This is supposed to be a song where two people are resigned to their breakup. It needs to be more restrained and sadder. Phil Collins is doing a better job at that, but they're both pretty wrong for this song.
My verdict: Don't like it. Here's Phil Collins performing this song with Laura Pausini and an acoustic guitar. It's a better song for having one better singer and simpler instrumentation. So this could be a better song if it weren't quite so mired in tropes of the 1980s.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Song #584: "We Built This City" by Starship
Date: Nov 16, 1985
Weeks: 2
Well, this is going to be a tough one. I've heard this song trashed up and down the Internet. It's an objectively terrible song, emblematic of everything that was wrong with cheesy synth-pop-rock in the 1980s. The problem for me is this: This was my first favorite song, and I still have warm feelings for it.
It's guilty of all the worst sins of 80s music. The synth keyboards blare in both the treble and the bass. The drums are primarily that echoing 80s drum I've complained about before. The guitars are also at their most blaring. The singers are fairly androgynous; it's hard to even tell Grace Slick's voice apart from Mickey Thomas unless you know the song. And yet it all manages to work together to create a cohesive whole. The song is so bold and unapologetic and unafraid to be an 80s pop-rock song that I can't help but like it still. I complained about the music for "Sara" (#591), but that was using many of these same sounds in a soft song, and it was incongruous and felt fake. This song isn't trying to be soft. It's just trying to be rock and roll, albeit in a gentle, synthesized 80s kind of way, and the enthusiasm is infectious.
The enthusiasm for what, I'm not sure. I have never understood the lyrics, and I still don't. They're utter nonsense. Songfacts has a wacky theory: "a cry of rebellion against a corporation trying to ban rock and roll in an imaginary future." Yes, the politics and culture of the 1980s was so friendly to popular music that they had to go pick an imaginary fight. And not communicate it very clearly. "Who rides the wrecking ball into our guitars?" Is this that classic evolution-of-metaphor problem? Let me see if I can trace it. "Someone is destroying music" expands to "Who is wrecking our guitars?" expands to "Who's taking a wrecking ball to our guitars?" expands to "Who rides the wrecking ball into our guitars?" The result is a flowery line that is so far removed from the original metaphor that all meaning has been lost.
The bigger lyrical problem is the chorus and title. "We built this city on rock and roll." That's almost certainly untrue. No cities were founded or built because of rock and roll. Am I wrong here? Are there any cities that were built or even expanded because of rock and roll? Music is big in Nashville, but that's mostly country music. Las Vegas boomed because of musical performances, but that was all kinds of music. Seattle boomed in the 90s because of grunge rock, but this song is from 1985. That hadn't happened yet. And most of the bigger cities in the world were big before rock and roll came along. Maybe it's Memphis? Elvis presumably drew rock and roll music to Memphis, even if Memphis isn't that big a city. Or maybe they mean that theoretical future city trying to ban rock and roll, but they don't bother to explain it. But whatever. The lyrics are nonsense and I don't care. Maybe this song is the reason I don't hold nonsense lyrics against a song, because I loved it even though I could never understand the meaning.
My verdict: Like it. It's a fun pop song, and a genuinely good product of its era. Maybe I have too much nostalgic affection for the song to view it objectively, but I still think it's good, anyway.
Weeks: 2
Well, this is going to be a tough one. I've heard this song trashed up and down the Internet. It's an objectively terrible song, emblematic of everything that was wrong with cheesy synth-pop-rock in the 1980s. The problem for me is this: This was my first favorite song, and I still have warm feelings for it.
It's guilty of all the worst sins of 80s music. The synth keyboards blare in both the treble and the bass. The drums are primarily that echoing 80s drum I've complained about before. The guitars are also at their most blaring. The singers are fairly androgynous; it's hard to even tell Grace Slick's voice apart from Mickey Thomas unless you know the song. And yet it all manages to work together to create a cohesive whole. The song is so bold and unapologetic and unafraid to be an 80s pop-rock song that I can't help but like it still. I complained about the music for "Sara" (#591), but that was using many of these same sounds in a soft song, and it was incongruous and felt fake. This song isn't trying to be soft. It's just trying to be rock and roll, albeit in a gentle, synthesized 80s kind of way, and the enthusiasm is infectious.
The enthusiasm for what, I'm not sure. I have never understood the lyrics, and I still don't. They're utter nonsense. Songfacts has a wacky theory: "a cry of rebellion against a corporation trying to ban rock and roll in an imaginary future." Yes, the politics and culture of the 1980s was so friendly to popular music that they had to go pick an imaginary fight. And not communicate it very clearly. "Who rides the wrecking ball into our guitars?" Is this that classic evolution-of-metaphor problem? Let me see if I can trace it. "Someone is destroying music" expands to "Who is wrecking our guitars?" expands to "Who's taking a wrecking ball to our guitars?" expands to "Who rides the wrecking ball into our guitars?" The result is a flowery line that is so far removed from the original metaphor that all meaning has been lost.
The bigger lyrical problem is the chorus and title. "We built this city on rock and roll." That's almost certainly untrue. No cities were founded or built because of rock and roll. Am I wrong here? Are there any cities that were built or even expanded because of rock and roll? Music is big in Nashville, but that's mostly country music. Las Vegas boomed because of musical performances, but that was all kinds of music. Seattle boomed in the 90s because of grunge rock, but this song is from 1985. That hadn't happened yet. And most of the bigger cities in the world were big before rock and roll came along. Maybe it's Memphis? Elvis presumably drew rock and roll music to Memphis, even if Memphis isn't that big a city. Or maybe they mean that theoretical future city trying to ban rock and roll, but they don't bother to explain it. But whatever. The lyrics are nonsense and I don't care. Maybe this song is the reason I don't hold nonsense lyrics against a song, because I loved it even though I could never understand the meaning.
My verdict: Like it. It's a fun pop song, and a genuinely good product of its era. Maybe I have too much nostalgic affection for the song to view it objectively, but I still think it's good, anyway.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Song #580: "Take On Me" by A-Ha
Date: Oct 19, 1985
Weeks: 1
If I had to sum up the music of the 1980s in one song, it would be "Take On Me" by A-Ha. There's a reason it keeps showing up at the center of 80s music retrospectives.
The music is manufactured almost entirely in a synthesizer, and doesn't apologize for it for a second. That heavy 80s drum kit sound, synthesized keyboards, and even the singer's high-pitched voice are all hallmarks of the era. The video shows a guitar, but it's way in the background of the soundscape here and you could be forgiven for not knowing it was there.
Synthesized or not, the music drives the song. The drums and keyboards propel it forward during the chorus and instrumental sections, but get out of the way to let the vocals carry the verses. The keyboard riff that opens the song and repeats during the bridge is probably the song's most recognizable part because it's so bold. That keyboard riff alone would probably make this song a classic, but the great thing about this song is that there's more to it than that.
The high-pitched vocals are attention-grabbing but never grating. The singer keeps his voice controlled and is still pleasant to listen to even when he hits the falsetto range. And his slight Norwegian accent adds a certain quality that forgives the silliness of the lyrics.
And the lyrics are entirely silly, but who cares? The keyboards, drums, and vocals are all so attention-getting and fun that there's barely any room left in your attention span for the lyrics. As far as I can tell, they're about how the guy is kind of shy about talking to the object of his affection. It plays into that stereotype of the quiet, shy person who can't express how they feel except by writing a song about it. That's a fairly classic sentiment in pop music. I'm still not sure what "Take on me. Take me on" really means, but who cares? The music is so awesome, you could replace the lyrics entirely and still have a great song.
The music video is also a classic, and I have no doubt it contributed to the popularity of the song. It's got intriguing visuals, a simple plot, and a bit of "how'd they do that?" special effects. I suppose those 3 elements are present in just about every great music video.
My verdict: Like it. It's an era-defining classic. And it lends itself well to stylish remakes by some of my favorite bands.
Weeks: 1
If I had to sum up the music of the 1980s in one song, it would be "Take On Me" by A-Ha. There's a reason it keeps showing up at the center of 80s music retrospectives.
The music is manufactured almost entirely in a synthesizer, and doesn't apologize for it for a second. That heavy 80s drum kit sound, synthesized keyboards, and even the singer's high-pitched voice are all hallmarks of the era. The video shows a guitar, but it's way in the background of the soundscape here and you could be forgiven for not knowing it was there.
Synthesized or not, the music drives the song. The drums and keyboards propel it forward during the chorus and instrumental sections, but get out of the way to let the vocals carry the verses. The keyboard riff that opens the song and repeats during the bridge is probably the song's most recognizable part because it's so bold. That keyboard riff alone would probably make this song a classic, but the great thing about this song is that there's more to it than that.
The high-pitched vocals are attention-grabbing but never grating. The singer keeps his voice controlled and is still pleasant to listen to even when he hits the falsetto range. And his slight Norwegian accent adds a certain quality that forgives the silliness of the lyrics.
And the lyrics are entirely silly, but who cares? The keyboards, drums, and vocals are all so attention-getting and fun that there's barely any room left in your attention span for the lyrics. As far as I can tell, they're about how the guy is kind of shy about talking to the object of his affection. It plays into that stereotype of the quiet, shy person who can't express how they feel except by writing a song about it. That's a fairly classic sentiment in pop music. I'm still not sure what "Take on me. Take me on" really means, but who cares? The music is so awesome, you could replace the lyrics entirely and still have a great song.
The music video is also a classic, and I have no doubt it contributed to the popularity of the song. It's got intriguing visuals, a simple plot, and a bit of "how'd they do that?" special effects. I suppose those 3 elements are present in just about every great music video.
My verdict: Like it. It's an era-defining classic. And it lends itself well to stylish remakes by some of my favorite bands.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Song #595: "Addicted to Love" by Robert Palmer
Date: May 3, 1986
Weeks: 1
Oh good. After "Broken Wings" by Mr. Mister, I was starting to worry that my 80s nostalgia was misplaced. But this song made me remember everything I liked in 80s music.
Unlike "Broken Wings," the guitar parts in this song drive it. They are bold and strong and featured. The drum is driving, but has just enough variety to stay interesting. The synth-keyboards accent the rest of the song properly. Synth-keyboards seem to be a bad match with soft rock songs, but other kinds of rock songs can make them awesome.
Robert Palmer has one of those great gravelly voices that makes anything sound cool. He's emotionally invested in the song and performs it well.
I'm working to adequately describe why this song sounds so great, but one of the great things about good pop music is that when it's good, it just works and you can't necessarily identify all the parts that make it work. I can talk about each element, but the bottom line is that they just click together. It's like alchemy. You turned lead into gold, but darned if you can figure out how you did it and manage to repeat it.
The lyrics are maybe the only weak spot, and they're not even that bad. Like a lot of songs since illicit drugs and rock music met, this song compares being in love to being addicted to drugs. This one in particular tackles withdrawal. "Your heart sweats, your body shakes, another kiss is what it takes."
That's fine, and I think in the 1980s there may not have been as many variations on this theme as there are now, but this song doesn't quite go into a story. Who's addicted to love? Why are they addicted? Who are you to this person, and why do you care? My best guess is that maybe this guy is looking for women who are on the rebound from an ended relationship because he's looking for an easy hookup. I'm basing almost all of this on the line "Another kiss and you'll be mine." If that line means something else, then I'm really not sure what the song's real meaning is.
Regardless, the lyrics in the verses are incidental. Nobody remembers anything but "Might as well face it, you're addicted to love" anyway. They also remember the music video, with the band of identical women. Other than a striking image, I'm not really sure I get what it's supposed to mean. I guess it could mean he's saying all women are the same, but since that interpretation interferes with my ability to enjoy the song, I prefer to just ignore it and enjoy the music.
My verdict: Like it. I haven't heard this song in a while, and I forgot how good it was. Definitely an 80s classic.
Weeks: 1
Oh good. After "Broken Wings" by Mr. Mister, I was starting to worry that my 80s nostalgia was misplaced. But this song made me remember everything I liked in 80s music.
Unlike "Broken Wings," the guitar parts in this song drive it. They are bold and strong and featured. The drum is driving, but has just enough variety to stay interesting. The synth-keyboards accent the rest of the song properly. Synth-keyboards seem to be a bad match with soft rock songs, but other kinds of rock songs can make them awesome.
Robert Palmer has one of those great gravelly voices that makes anything sound cool. He's emotionally invested in the song and performs it well.
I'm working to adequately describe why this song sounds so great, but one of the great things about good pop music is that when it's good, it just works and you can't necessarily identify all the parts that make it work. I can talk about each element, but the bottom line is that they just click together. It's like alchemy. You turned lead into gold, but darned if you can figure out how you did it and manage to repeat it.
The lyrics are maybe the only weak spot, and they're not even that bad. Like a lot of songs since illicit drugs and rock music met, this song compares being in love to being addicted to drugs. This one in particular tackles withdrawal. "Your heart sweats, your body shakes, another kiss is what it takes."
That's fine, and I think in the 1980s there may not have been as many variations on this theme as there are now, but this song doesn't quite go into a story. Who's addicted to love? Why are they addicted? Who are you to this person, and why do you care? My best guess is that maybe this guy is looking for women who are on the rebound from an ended relationship because he's looking for an easy hookup. I'm basing almost all of this on the line "Another kiss and you'll be mine." If that line means something else, then I'm really not sure what the song's real meaning is.
Regardless, the lyrics in the verses are incidental. Nobody remembers anything but "Might as well face it, you're addicted to love" anyway. They also remember the music video, with the band of identical women. Other than a striking image, I'm not really sure I get what it's supposed to mean. I guess it could mean he's saying all women are the same, but since that interpretation interferes with my ability to enjoy the song, I prefer to just ignore it and enjoy the music.
My verdict: Like it. I haven't heard this song in a while, and I forgot how good it was. Definitely an 80s classic.
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Song #586: "Broken Wings" by Mr. Mister
Date: Dec 7, 1985
Weeks: 2
I mentioned the other day that I wasn't certain how to describe the soft rock sound of the 70s, but boy oh boy can I tell you all about the soft rock sound of the 80s. This is a great example of the 80s soft rock genre. It's so cheesy.
The male singer screeches, trying to sound passionate but coming off whiny. The guitars are overly restrained and repetitive, pushed to the background and not allowed to break out and become the featured part of the song. Synthesized keyboard accents complement the singing, but don't sound very good. It's kind of amazing how many bands in the 80s were unafraid of featuring that fake keyboard sound.
The lyrics make their general meaning apparent, but are so insufficiently descriptive that it's hard to maintain interest in them. The gist is that the guy is worried his relationship is failing, but he thinks that by singing this song and recommitting to the relationship, he can save it. It's like a pre-breakup song. But you'll note it's not an apology song.
My inner cynic can't help but express the following thought: Was Mr. Mister attempting to profit from people's pain by writing a song specifically for people whose relationship was currently hanging from a thread? Because this isn't one of those songs where the sentiment is still applicable years later, after the relationship has either been repaired or ended. The target window is oddly specific.
I really dislike the lyric "the book of love will open up and let us in." What's the book of love? How do you enter a book, unless you are Gumby? This is an odd metaphor. I'll give them the metaphor about a bird learning to fly after breaking its wings but the book of love metaphor feels like filler.
My verdict: Don't like it. It kind of fails at all levels. It's an example of the 80s soft rock genre, but it also highlights what was wrong with 80s soft rock. I'm sure there will be some good 80s soft rock later, but this sure isn't it.
Weeks: 2
I mentioned the other day that I wasn't certain how to describe the soft rock sound of the 70s, but boy oh boy can I tell you all about the soft rock sound of the 80s. This is a great example of the 80s soft rock genre. It's so cheesy.
The male singer screeches, trying to sound passionate but coming off whiny. The guitars are overly restrained and repetitive, pushed to the background and not allowed to break out and become the featured part of the song. Synthesized keyboard accents complement the singing, but don't sound very good. It's kind of amazing how many bands in the 80s were unafraid of featuring that fake keyboard sound.
The lyrics make their general meaning apparent, but are so insufficiently descriptive that it's hard to maintain interest in them. The gist is that the guy is worried his relationship is failing, but he thinks that by singing this song and recommitting to the relationship, he can save it. It's like a pre-breakup song. But you'll note it's not an apology song.
My inner cynic can't help but express the following thought: Was Mr. Mister attempting to profit from people's pain by writing a song specifically for people whose relationship was currently hanging from a thread? Because this isn't one of those songs where the sentiment is still applicable years later, after the relationship has either been repaired or ended. The target window is oddly specific.
I really dislike the lyric "the book of love will open up and let us in." What's the book of love? How do you enter a book, unless you are Gumby? This is an odd metaphor. I'll give them the metaphor about a bird learning to fly after breaking its wings but the book of love metaphor feels like filler.
My verdict: Don't like it. It kind of fails at all levels. It's an example of the 80s soft rock genre, but it also highlights what was wrong with 80s soft rock. I'm sure there will be some good 80s soft rock later, but this sure isn't it.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Song #587: "Say You, Say Me" by Lionel Richie
Date: Dec 21, 1985
Weeks: 4
I guess my random generator decided to start me off in the deep end of 80s soft synth-cheese. This song makes no apologies for the synthesized sounds. "Boing boing boing", it says, "I sound nothing like an acoustic guitar and it's the 80s so you love it!"
I can't say I've followed Lionel Richie much. He sings okay, but his generally soft style is hard to maintain interest in. And I don't know what he's singing about here. "Say you, say me. Say it together. Naturally." Does Lionel Richie want "you" and "me" to be "together"? Naturally? I guess the gist is that everybody's lonely and looking for a friend, but like a lot of pop songs, you really have to dig through some silly lyrics to glean the meaning.
Then there's a climax of overly poundy 80s drums which leads to... nothing. The bland chorus starts over. Those drums promised a crescendo and failed to deliver. And we nap through verse 2 which just says the same thing. Everybody's lonely and it sucks.
Then the bridge happens, and it suddenly gets awesome. The synth falls away and a rock guitar and drums pick up. The tempo picks up and Lionel gets excited. "The whole world's got you dancin'." I'm not sure about the whole world, but these 20 seconds have me dancing. "Believe in who you are, you are a shining star!" Forget the thing about being lonely, we're all awesome as we are! Woo!
Then the bridge ends, and we're back in slow synth lonesome land. What the heck was that? It's like the song got bored of itself and decided to switch to a different song both by and about people that are way more fun. Fortunately, it ends soon after that, but not before the boring part can sap away all the goodwill the good part generated.
I wish they'd thrown out the rest of the song and just expanded that bridge to 4 minutes. I only vaguely remember hearing this song in the past, and I don't remember that bridge at all. I must have tuned out during the boring parts and completely overlooked the part that actually rocked.
Watching the video, this song must be from a movie based on the all the clips used, but I don't remember this movie, and the only person I recognize is Gregory Hines. I'm going to feel bad about forgetting this piece of 80s pop culture after I look it up...
White Nights, starring Gregory Hines and Mikhail Baryshnikov. I didn't know Baryshnikov made a movie. I don't remember this movie at all. What else...
Oh geez.
This song won the Oscar for Best Song.
Are you crazy, 1985? Most years, I would have let that slide. But 1985 brought us Back to the Future, which contained "The Power of Love" by Huey Lewis (#576 on the Number Ones list). That song was everywhere and it was awesome. At least "The Power of Love" was nominated. But people actually sat down to compare these two songs and somehow concluded that "Say You, Say Me" was better.
Then again, that 20 seconds of bridge was pretty awesome.
My Verdict: Don't like it. 20 good seconds doesn't make up for the rest.
Weeks: 4
I guess my random generator decided to start me off in the deep end of 80s soft synth-cheese. This song makes no apologies for the synthesized sounds. "Boing boing boing", it says, "I sound nothing like an acoustic guitar and it's the 80s so you love it!"
I can't say I've followed Lionel Richie much. He sings okay, but his generally soft style is hard to maintain interest in. And I don't know what he's singing about here. "Say you, say me. Say it together. Naturally." Does Lionel Richie want "you" and "me" to be "together"? Naturally? I guess the gist is that everybody's lonely and looking for a friend, but like a lot of pop songs, you really have to dig through some silly lyrics to glean the meaning.
Then there's a climax of overly poundy 80s drums which leads to... nothing. The bland chorus starts over. Those drums promised a crescendo and failed to deliver. And we nap through verse 2 which just says the same thing. Everybody's lonely and it sucks.
Then the bridge happens, and it suddenly gets awesome. The synth falls away and a rock guitar and drums pick up. The tempo picks up and Lionel gets excited. "The whole world's got you dancin'." I'm not sure about the whole world, but these 20 seconds have me dancing. "Believe in who you are, you are a shining star!" Forget the thing about being lonely, we're all awesome as we are! Woo!
Then the bridge ends, and we're back in slow synth lonesome land. What the heck was that? It's like the song got bored of itself and decided to switch to a different song both by and about people that are way more fun. Fortunately, it ends soon after that, but not before the boring part can sap away all the goodwill the good part generated.
I wish they'd thrown out the rest of the song and just expanded that bridge to 4 minutes. I only vaguely remember hearing this song in the past, and I don't remember that bridge at all. I must have tuned out during the boring parts and completely overlooked the part that actually rocked.
Watching the video, this song must be from a movie based on the all the clips used, but I don't remember this movie, and the only person I recognize is Gregory Hines. I'm going to feel bad about forgetting this piece of 80s pop culture after I look it up...
White Nights, starring Gregory Hines and Mikhail Baryshnikov. I didn't know Baryshnikov made a movie. I don't remember this movie at all. What else...
Oh geez.
This song won the Oscar for Best Song.
Are you crazy, 1985? Most years, I would have let that slide. But 1985 brought us Back to the Future, which contained "The Power of Love" by Huey Lewis (#576 on the Number Ones list). That song was everywhere and it was awesome. At least "The Power of Love" was nominated. But people actually sat down to compare these two songs and somehow concluded that "Say You, Say Me" was better.
Then again, that 20 seconds of bridge was pretty awesome.
My Verdict: Don't like it. 20 good seconds doesn't make up for the rest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)