Punknews.org
The Strokes - Is This It? (Cover Artwork)

The Strokes

The Strokes: Is This It?Is This It? (2001)
Sony Music Entertainment

Reviewer Rating: 3
User Rating:


Contributed by: seekseek
(others by this writer | submit your own)

The Strokes are probably the most hyped band out there right now. They are professed to be the forerunners of the current trend of garage rock, which may be true to the extent that they may lead that trend in sales, but only to that extent. They are satirically called a "24-car garage rock band" b.
iTunes StoreAmazon


The Strokes are probably the most hyped band out there right now. They are professed to be the forerunners of the current trend of garage rock, which may be true to the extent that they may lead that trend in sales, but only to that extent. They are satirically called a "24-car garage rock band" by most critics in alternative and underground music press, with good reason. Singer/songwriter Julian Casablancas is the son of modeling super-mogul John Casablancas. Casablancas and guitarist Nick Valensi met at Dwight School, a private school in Manhattan. Guitarist Albert Hammond Jr. met Casablancas at L'Institut Le Rosey in Switzerland when they were younger and joined the band when he attended NYU for film school. Bassist Nikolai Fraiture was attending Le Cest Francais in the Upper East Side. As you can see, the Strokes' roots are far from the working-class type. Obviously, it isn't fair to denounce a band simply because of the class they were born into, but listening to their debut album, "Is This It?", gives you the distinct feeling that the music is more paid for than it is from the heart.

The lead guitar is probably the strongest suit of the strokes, with the bass guitar being second. Casablancas is by far their weak point. His vocals at times are decent while damaging to songs at others. Still though, they fit a lot better than they would with any other band. Lyrically he is quite inconsistent. Some are alright, but most are average at best, with a good lot being fairly bad. Certainly more interesting than the "cash and bitches" lyrics of mainstream rap, the faked heartache of faux-emo, the cheesy angst of nu-metal, or the "thong tha-thong thong thong" of today's R&B. Comparisons to the Velvet Underground are so far off as Lou Reeds lyrics were extremely well-written and spoke volumes. Plus the Strokes don't come close to matching the Underground's ability to write beautiful yet abrasive music. Their sound is unquestionably derivative of The Velvet Underground and Television, but they don't deserve to eat out of either of those bands' trash cans (not that they'd ever have to).

It is hard to find stand-out tracks on their debut album, Is This It?, as they are consistently average. The best song, "New York City Cops", is unfortunately on the U.K.-only version. This is because the U.S. version came out very shortly after 9/11 and someone (most likely the label) found it to be inappropriate at the time. This is certainly understandable and to be expected from a major label, as they have an image to uphold. However, personally I find such censorship to be in contrary to what should be done. Over-sensitivity hinders creativity and I really believe that it slows the "healing process". Taboo is never a good thing. Enough ranting; the replacement for "New York City Cops" on the U.S. version is "When It Started", which itself is better than the bulk of the album.

The Strokes are a classic case of the damage caused by being over-hyped. As Newton's Third Law of Motion states: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." The more a band is hyped by the mainstream press, the more people in the underground like to bash them. Also, when you claim an album to be more than it is, it simply provides the listener with more disappointment when they realize it isn't all it's cracked up to be. That being said, the Strokes aren't as terrible as you might think I'd find them. Their musicianship is very good. Their songwriting is pretty lacking. As a band, they seem to work well together. They are nowhere near being the band that will save rock 'n' roll as the critics sensationalize them as and I think this is going to really hurt them when it comes time for their follow-up, especially since this trend of "garage rock revival" in the mainstream will be old hat by then. I am, however, interested in seeing what they come up with. All-in-all don't let their hype completely disenfranchise you from this album; it is enjoyable in moderation. You can bash them all you want, but you know you'll be content to turn on the radio and here them. Would you rather be hearing Ludacris, Slipknot, or the rest of that garbage? Anyhow, at least they're better than the Vines.

Review originally from Mediaocre Industries, where the players play.

 

 
People who liked this also liked:
The Distillers - Sing Sing Death HouseMy Bloody Valentine - LovelessBad Religion - No ControlNirvana - NevermindBlink-182 - Dude RanchThe Germs - M.I.A.: The Complete AnthologyBad Brains - Bad BrainsPropagandhi - Today's Empires, Tomorrow's AshesMy Chemical Romance - I Brought You My Bullets You Brought Me Your LoveMurder City Devils - R.I.P.

Please login or register to post comments.What are the benefits of having a Punknews.org account?
  • Share your opinion by posting comments on the stories that interest you
  • Rate music and bands and help shape the weekly top ten
  • Let Punknews.org use your ratings to help you find bands and albums you might like
  • Customize features on the site to get the news the way you want.
Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not respon sible for them in any way. Seriously.
Anonymous (May 31, 2004)

awful music for awful americans

degenerate (February 6, 2003)

...what this band is shit. ok then.

Anonymous (October 13, 2002)

i never said that the strokes sounded like the velvet underground, because they don't. i said that they're going over established territory for profit. fuck off.

Anonymous (October 7, 2002)

I love this album. The review reads like it was written by a 5th grader. Better luck next time.

Anonymous (October 7, 2002)

Garage rock?

Garage rock was never a form of popular music. It was basic rock n roll, but played by amateurs, similar to your basic punk rock, but lacking that "I want to be independent" stance. Most of garage rock was too raw, gritty and poorly played to be pop even if a lot of it just mimicked the Beatles.

These guys a just a rock band. Garage rock is extinct.

waste_elite (October 7, 2002)

right on jimi

Anonymous (October 7, 2002)

"hey guys, let's form a band that emulates the style and music of a band that, while not recognized by the mainstream public, did something amazing. except that we'll make a shitload of cash off of their hard work and ideas. way to go strokes"

Since when is emulating a band like the Velvet Underground a bad thing? Sure the strokes really don't sound anything like them, but if they did, who cares? The Velvet Underground have inspired way too many bands to mention with their music that it's a total moot point...the VU were so damn good, that they SHOULD be emulated...we should only be so lucky as to have bands making music even half as good as they did...the Velvet Underground were and still are the best band ever...get over it...

"Is this it?" is a fucking great album, and i don't give a fuck if they sound similar to the VU or Television...they put out an awesome album....if more bands copied off of the velvet underground instead of braid or modest mouse, the scene would be a million times better....

emogames.com rocks...and so does mcpb....now paul Barman...that dude is totally punk rock... Or does he sound too much like Eminem because he's white?

Jimi

Anonymous (October 7, 2002)

"Bands like NOFX, Propagandhi, Bad Religion, Lagwagon, etc. took a great sound and an even better ethic and built on it, making it their own but not making it generic."

all those bands are still around you know. they didn't stop making music.
the punk scene hasn't been unified for some time. it evolved into so many different genres, and it seems that there is tension between all of them. hell, there's even tension between bands of the same music (yea, all those hardcore bands who are "different types" bitching to not listen to the other band)
good god, it just sucks. and i think everyone knows that. but just because the scene is divided doesn't mean that there isn't originality, intelligence, and great music being born every day.
go look for it.

Anonymous (October 6, 2002)

The Strokes are not even remotely garage rock. They are rock'n'roll plain and simple. It really pisses me off when all the newer bands are getting called garage, they are not even close. I do like the Strokes by the way, but the reviewer is some what correct. The actual music itself, does not stand up to the enormous amount of hype it has recieved. And in conclusion I'd really like to see what would have happened to this band if they would've had to slug it out in the underground for a few years, like most bands have to, before they got their "break." My bet is they would have broken up already.

waste_elite (October 6, 2002)

number one, the strokes aren't a punk band so quit bitching about the sanctity of your "Scene".

number two, strokes are not exploiting this long standing genre known as "garage rock" as they don't sound a fucking bit like any garage bands.

number three, i think you're looking too far into this.

number four, that guy that asked what's the point of arguing as nobody cares about anybody eles opinion, is right.

the end

Anonymous (October 6, 2002)

Not sure why everybody here always argues. Yeah, we all have different opinions, but can't we all just leave it at that?

Why argue with people that could care less about your view?

Anonymous (October 6, 2002)

You know, I realize that punk rock is basically just a paradox in and of itself, and a lot of mainstream, average listener politics have always been a part of the scene, albiet more noticably since the "Green Day" and "Offspring" incidents of the mid 1990's, the "ska" revival shortly thereafter, the "emo" thing even more recently, and now this corporate sponsored, inauthentic "garage rock" pseudo-explosion that we're seeing now. I have become more and more disappointed lately with the stature of this once rebellious, unified rock and roll scene, where no labels or boundaries were pre determined, and people liked what they liked because it appealed to them and not because 150,000 other bands just like their favorite were pre packaged and readily available. When I started getting into punk rock in the late eighties (yes, I'm a young'un, I know, but bear with me) we had bands like the Misfits, Descendents, DRI, Ramones, who were all doing their own thing for their own reasons. You had to seek these bands out if you were going to listen to them, because they didn't have all the hype and publicity that today's punk bands get. Even the next set of bands to emerge were great; fast, politically charged, and all about subversive culture (i.e. suburban boredom, gay sex, drugs, and other such issues still untouched in the corporate rock world.) Bands like NOFX, Propagandhi, Bad Religion, Lagwagon, etc. took a great sound and an even better ethic and built on it, making it their own but not making it generic. Suddenly I find myself in a world where punk rock has no meaning. Punk rock is no longer a unification of young people under a higher way of thinking. There is no intelligence left in the scene, no moral or political motives. Punk rock to me was a learning experience. It was the first time I was ever accepted for what I was. People looked past the 300-pound freshman in high school and saw a functioning mind, a decent musical talent, and a unique sense of self, and it was the first time I ever felt immediately accepted. And yet, here we are, some 15 years later, and once again, I am an alien, this time in the scene that I once called home. All anyone cares about now is which sound is stylish, which bands are required listening to fit in with your peers, and what will come next. Even our own media (ie punknews.org, punkbands.com, etc.) only seem interested in reporting on the next big thing. I guess what I am getting at is that the strokes/vines/hives will all have their day in the sun, just like Reel Big Fish did, just like Fenix TX did, just like Student Rick and (one of my personal favorites) Jimmy Eat World are right now; but until we can reclaim our scene and make it authentic again, and every Fairweather that comes along stops sounding like every other Saves the Day you've ever heard, and the lyrics and people get real again, I'll be off in my own little world, pining for the days when the music meant something more than impressing 15 year old girls with nipple piercings. Oh, and hats off to all the bands that have been doing garage rock for so many years, not because it's the thing to do, but because that music moved them on a much more personal level. Brace yourselves, ladies and gentlemen. The foundation has been laid for the exploitation of yet another great sound in the name of the almighty dollar; and keep in mind that those Strokes patches and ripped jeans that you're spending your bottom dollar on are within about a year and a half of being completely worthless, so you might want to find a way to invest more wisely.

waste_elite (October 5, 2002)

"your missing my point. They come from a certain social class. This effects them. Their is no ethical judgement there. Their image is the result of a fashionably minded upper class chic. Whether that is good or bad is up to you. Their image however is very much conscious and trying to be a specific way for a specific purpose."

i didn't realize there were rules on how to dress? they dress the way they do because they like the way it looks, fucking simple as that. why should every person be restricted to wearing only what their social class expects them to wear? if i were rich, i sure as hell wouldn't want to walk around in Gucci loafers and a fur coat. i'd dress how i wanted to dress, what i thought looked cool.

"Its one thing to hypocritically bitch about a band making money like its bad that they can finally afford rent, and not have to work a shit job. But its another to bitch about a band that isn't just rich, they were filthy fucking insane born rich, and aren't just living comfortably, they go to switzerland to go to private school for fucks sake. I'm not criticising that they have "some money". Its not even theres. Yes, I can afford a computer. But thats different than my dad being able to buy a private jet. The money is irrelevant, the point is they behave like the stereotype, and give off the general attitude of high style indifference. No, they didn't choose to be rich, but they weren't forced at gunpoint to ski in the alps, and they do choose how to live within that life."

so you're saying that if your parents we're filthy rich and were more than willing to pay for excess luxuries, you would refuse it? they "chose" to live in this life of wealth provided by their parents and somehow they are bad people? and i never once picked up this "high-style indifference" you think they ooze of. they act like just about every other fucking rock band.

"If they had gotten rich off this album, I wouldnt care, but maybe you sympathize with a guy whose loaded and has nothing to worry about complaining about wasting his time on "someday", but I don't."

since when can a person not sympathize with a singer's lyrics due to the fact that the singer is rich. good god, look at all of the excellent bands through history that we're filthy fucking rich. the beatles, the rolling stones, and a million others. i never once stopped and thought, "hey these guys are rich! what the hell are they crying about! i can't relate to this!".

Anonymous (October 4, 2002)

how the hell did you guys find out that they had so much money anyway?

Anonymous (October 4, 2002)

I sound so jaded.
wyzo

Anonymous (October 4, 2002)

"and who are you to say that their image isn't their's"

your missing my point. They come from a certain social class. This effects them. Their is no ethical judgement there. Their image is the result of a fashionably minded upper class chic. Whether that is good or bad is up to you. Their image however is very much conscious and trying to be a specific way for a specific purpose.

Its one thing to hypocritically bitch about a band making money like its bad that they can finally afford rent, and not have to work a shit job. But its another to bitch about a band that isn't just rich, they were filthy fucking insane born rich, and aren't just living comfortably, they go to switzerland to go to private school for fucks sake. I'm not criticising that they have "some money". Its not even theres. Yes, I can afford a computer. But thats different than my dad being able to buy a private jet. The money is irrelevant, the point is they behave like the stereotype, and give off the general attitude of high style indifference. No, they didn't choose to be rich, but they weren't forced at gunpoint to ski in the alps, and they do choose how to live within that life.
Bruce Springstein is fucking rich, but I have no problem with him, he doesn't act like the proverbial cliche.

If they had gotten rich off this album, I wouldnt care, but maybe you sympathize with a guy whose loaded and has nothing to worry about complaining about wasting his time on "someday", but I don't.

waste_elite (October 4, 2002)

i think the cd is excellent. to each his own...

Anonymous (October 4, 2002)

Prepare for another meaningless review.
the strokes suck not because of their image, not because their rich, not because they are on a major. they suck because their cd is poor. that being said go ahead and like them it doesnt hurt my feelings when other people listen to bad music. as far as the whole garage-rock revival goes. the strokes, hives, vines, white stripes,
t(i)nc have nothing to do with it. well maybe the hives and t(i)nc moreso. The whole idea as far as i am aware came out of sweden but is as much attributable to the hellacopters, turbonegro and the like as to these other bands. i thought i had a point earlier apparently not so ill stop wasting your time now.

Anonymous (October 3, 2002)

well hell, at least we've got people actually criticizing the music now instead of how they dress.

ludacris (October 3, 2002)

hey wtf, i just read that ludacris diss...wtf...

MOVE BITCH...GET OUT THA WAY

ludacris (October 3, 2002)

this cd is good. i mean, i really wanted to hate this band but they do have some great catchy songs.

waste_elite (October 3, 2002)

as far as songwriting goes, the strokes are leaps and bounds ahead of the hives. the hives may be more "rockin'" but i could care less about that. and who are you to say that their image isn't their's, but is simply what they are told to wear. methinks that's bullshit.

Anonymous (October 3, 2002)

Whenever someone says that you can't dislike a band based on image, I have to wonder why they think appearances are random flash in the pan expressions. Image implies things that are more than just image.

Thats why porno isn't just a movie that happens to have naked people fucking, coincidentally.

Especcially in a band as big as the strokes, who know they are "fashionable" you can bet your ass they aren't just wearing what they want for kicks. They have management, they have a whole bunch of people who are watching their asses to make sure they stay that way. Their image is very carefully laid down.

Its in that way I can't just let them wear 'what they want to' because its not taking place in a situation where they are just wearing what they want to.

And if you want me to talk about the music. Its completely unoriginal, sounds nostalgic for an era that quite franky I saw no demand to go back to, redundant and stagnant guitar parts, boringly vogue lyrics, uninspired moments of pendulum swinging motion, which is all the motion the album provokes, and even if like mr jaded man below in the comments who supposing we're all punk rock kids I judged the album not based on whether I can dance to it, I can't even die in my sleep to it without wanting to make myself a ghost to avenge dying with a frown on my face.

The strokes are tepid.

And The Hives are law, the strokes are crime.

wyzo

Anonymous (October 3, 2002)

"Is this it sounds like it was recorded by veterans- anyone who knows real rock and roll- not punk rock will agree. and im not talking about production quality either. The songs flow into each other. Nor do songs need to make you move around to be good. Thats what you kids dont get and will never get."

Hey, are you a bitter jaded old fart????

Methinks you have suffered a divorce or two.

waste_elite (October 3, 2002)

"hey guys, let's form a band that emulates the style and music of a band that, while not recognized by the mainstream public, did something amazing. except that we'll make a shitload of cash off of their hard work and ideas. way to go strokes"

you are so fucking stupid. the strokes were influenced by the Velvet Underground and possibly Television but they sound almost nothing like those bands. that argument pisses me off to no end. i mean, look at all of your favorite bands and how much they ripped off of other bands that came before them. have you ever even listened to the Velvet Underground before, or did you just read something about them in a magazine somewhere. i fucking love the VU and i really like the strokes. i can tell you they aren't NEARLY as derivative as you people would like them to be.

it's like saying all punk bands suck because they are just ripping off of the sex pistols and ramones. fucking stupid argument.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

hey guys, let's form a band that emulates the style and music of a band that, while not recognized by the mainstream public, did something amazing. except that we'll make a shitload of cash off of their hard work and ideas. way to go strokes. pat41, lick my ass.

Fuzzy (October 2, 2002)

This review was too much like a large scale magazine review, focusing a bit too much on the hype, fashion, and "world" that surrounds the disc, rather than the music contained therein. While I care what your stance about major label censorship is, I'd rather know what lyrics were in the song that got it censored, or a comparison that doesn't end in a negative tone. Just my two cents. Very professionally done, but that's the reason I don't enjoy reading Rolling Stone or CMJ.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

i like good music with intelligent lyrics.

"Is This It?"

nope.

abileneINlove (October 2, 2002)

Those jangly guitars! That Lou Reed impression!

Gets me every time. While RANDY, THE HIVES, and THE INTERNATIONAL (NOISE) CONSPIRACY resort to repetition and forced yelping, my boys from NYC throw in actual hooks! Clever guitar harmonies!

Its like Lou Reed, Mick Jagger and Iggy Pop, after losing a couple limbs of talent, creativity and innovation, started a boy band... and didn't shower.

Good idea though.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

you guys all kill me. those kids sitting there talking about being dirt poor- if you're that fucking poor, how the hell did you get that computer you're typing on, or that roof over your head? get off the soapbox. everyone here talks about how music shouldn't be about looks or style, but here you hypocrites are all criticizing the strokes for having money, and for what they wear. fuck that. they make good, mellow music. that's all that you should be judging them on.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

"This goes out to bostonmusicguy...

no matter how hard you try, your opinion does not count. why? because you like sum41. you have no musical taste whatsoever."Get over it shithead... so i like sum41... get over it. Fucking idiot.-BostonMusicGuy

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

The Strokes are aggressively mediocre. I think they suck, not because I'm too punk, or they're rich, but just because they're not very good and I don't enjoy their music. Rolling Stone recently called them "the hardest working band in rock". You couldn't pay me enough to believe that bullshit.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

shut up with your elitist attitude, give the guy a break. i bet you listen to the starting line (nothing bad about them), thinking you're soooo indie, while playing emogame.com.

haha, people like you bring tears to my eyes, though i'm not sure of that's out of pity or just because you are so ridiculously stupid.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

This goes out to bostonmusicguy...

no matter how hard you try, your opinion does not count. why? because you like sum41. you have no musical taste whatsoever.

Anonymous (October 2, 2002)

This is the first band in ages that really deserves the hype. I do think that ALL the songs on this are winners. I donít know why they would think of Julianís singing as a weak point. Itís all too easy to bash on bands that get hyped. This is way better than White Stripes or the Vines. These guys have that one thing that most bands today miss; they can write great songs with their eyes closed.

This album still hasnít left my cd changer once, and Iíve had it since September í01. Thatís a record.

Best album of 2001.

waste_elite (October 2, 2002)

some of you guys are fucking stupid. the majority of your complaints about the band dont't even revolve around the music, it revolves around their image. how fucking punkrock is that. i don't even get why this "image" they presest is so offensive anyways.

and i don't see how these guys are garage rock in any way. i guess they get lumped into that movement because they are "retro". when i think of garage rock, i think of hard, sleazy, messy, rock n roll (like the stooges). the strokes hardly fit in that category.

and the whole "i don't like the strokes because they aren't original" line is total bullshit. i guarentee they are more original than 90% of your favorite punk bands. people always say they are a Velvet Underground/Lou Reed knockoff, but that's bullshit as well. yeah, he sings like lou reed, but that's where the similarities end. musically they are far from the velvet underground. i see a sliver of VU in the strokes. influential to the band? yes. model for the band? no.

eh, it's good music. i don't give a shit about how the band dresses or if their parents are rich or if the retarded music press decided to hail them as the saviors of rock. it's good music.

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

"there are a lot of bands tat i won't listen to because of some facet of their personality. the strokes are one of them. the image just pisses me off to no end."You are a moron...Oh yea, this album fucking rules. I definitley agree that its one of the best albums of 2001.-BostonMusicGuy

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

there are a lot of bands tat i won't listen to because of some facet of their personality. the strokes are one of them. the image just pisses me off to no end.

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

rock the vote yo!

corey (October 1, 2002)

"Easily one of the best albums of 2001".....what?!

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Easily one of the best albums of 2001. What none of you seem to really grasp is that they don't want to be underground. They don't sound like garage rock, nor do they want to be. Everyone likes the Hives because they have a cheesy schtick but you know what? No one will know who the hives are in a year guarantee. Is this it sounds like it was recorded by veterans- anyone who knows real rock and roll- not punk rock will agree. and im not talking about production quality either. The songs flow into each other. Nor do songs need to make you move around to be good. Thats what you kids dont get and will never get. Nor is it the band fault if everyone imitates their style. so whats more punk rock? Not dressing how you want so no one copies you or doing what you want regardless of what everyone else is doing? go listen to your shitty punk ya fucking wankers.

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Garage rock wave should stop NOW!

This band is a vistim of henious fashion crimes against humanity and should all go back to their private art schools and learn how to mooch off their parents.

SOYBOMB (October 1, 2002)

I've only heard like 3 of their songs... I remember Last Night and thats about it.. Anyway, These guys just look way too bored when they play their own stuff.

Peace,
-SOYBOMB-

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Sickboi: Who took a cheap shot at Ludacris? I didnt read it on here. But you know what if anybody did then fuck them. Ludacris fucking rules. The only rap that I can actually sit around and listen to the entire album.Oh yea, and I actually like the Strokes a lot, forget what they look like, how they grew up, what haircut they sport, whatever... if you dont like them then fine but dont say you dont like them because they grew up rich, or because they have greasy hair or whatever shit excuses you guys have for not saying "I hate this band because they are popular"-BostonMusicGuy

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

"If the Strokes were 5 poor kids from Brooklyn, you'd all be on your knees lined up like circus seals. Classism at its finest."

You mean if they were your two friends who listen to their parents music, and play in the led zeppelin cover band?

If they were 5 poor kids from brooklyn, they wouldn't be playing this gambleless shite. And if they did, they'd be a stoner classic rock local band, thus, they'd be your friends who dick around on guitar, and like to watch "High fidelity" because they relate to it so very much.

wyzo

yellowtrash (October 1, 2002)

This CD isn't all too bad. But then again, it isn't too original either.

seek (October 1, 2002)

If the Strokes were 5 poor kids from Brooklyn I would have wouldn't have written the little paragraph about them being rich and about how that shouldn't disqualify them as a band. That's about all that would have changed.

RightCliqificus (October 1, 2002)

Y'know what i noticed? They suck. Thats what I noticed. I'm curious how they ever got associated with punk in the first place. Someone help me please. Listening to this band is watching a fat clown get raped (Not good, for those that don't know)

eyeball_kid (October 1, 2002)

This review is spot on. For me it's too average to be exciting. The hype machine in full effect. There's a lot worse.

The White Stripes lived up to the hype a lot better IMHO.

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

If the Strokes were five poor kids from Brooklyn, they wouldn't have a record contract.

boxcar1

waste_elite (October 1, 2002)

"If the Strokes were 5 poor kids from Brooklyn, you'd all be on your knees lined up like circus seals. Classism at its finest."

i think you're right

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

"Dude, the Hives suck...they're really NOT the next Nirvana."

The Hives are not trying to be the next Nirvana and sound nothing like them. I believe you are thinking of the Vines, cool guy.

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Whoah, no need to take such a cheap shot at Ludacris, he's actually a very talented rapper.

-sickboi

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

I like the strokes....I think "Is This It?" Is a great album for what it's worth...the songs aren't deep, and they're not trying to be....this disc makes me happy...I don't care where they came from or how rich they are...but still a damn fine review...

but any fool (rock critics) that think this band is anything even remotly close to the awesomeness that was the Velvet Underground should get their senses checked...

No band will ever match the greatness that was the Velvet Underground...EVER

Jimi

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Dude, the Hives suck...they're really NOT the next Nirvana. If the Strokes were 5 poor kids from Brooklyn, you'd all be on your knees lined up like circus seals. Classism at its finest.

THAT_GUY (October 1, 2002)

I hate the Strokes.They perpetuate this myth of being poor,and dressing dime store suave,but in reality,they're just a bunch of richass,no talent,money grubbers.Kinda like Midtown,with less talent(and Midtown has no talent).I like the Hives,who's "new" record came out years ago,Randy(their POR song is pretty cool),(T)INC,and,I hate to admit it,the Vines.Well,just that one song Get Free.We all have our guilty pleasures.I saw the Strokes on that 2 Dollar Bill thing on MTV2 a while back,and saw some bootleg concert footage from another concert,man do they blow live.Why do people like them so much ? Will someone explain this ?D they possess a voodoo I don't succumb to ?

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

I just dont get why their lumped in with the better garage punk n roll bands. Their not rocking enough, their nostalgic with no kick or zing. Its too detatched from real kick ass no frills rock. The hives got it, randy's got it, the strokes don't. Nothing against rich folk, but they don't have the spit and vinegar of what comprises rock and roll. The new bomb turks wouldn't sound like the new bomb turks if some of them had met in Swiss and swapped numbers at their private schools. It's an imitation of life, you don't have to be dirt poor to sing, hell you can be quite well off as alot of middle class punk rockers are, but you do have to at the least be in a position where the grit of rock and roll isn't just an abstract concept you heard rasped about on some record. And if I ever met the strokes, it would be like meeting a bunch of guys I have nothing in common with. Their life and world is so disconnected from mine. And I don't understand what they have to sing about that I should give two shits about.

And you can say they have no control over being bred into wealthy families, but they have control over getting Roman Coppola to direct their videos. AKA the lesser Coppola (though CQ was alright, his dad and sister are much better directors). Was Scorsese too busy or does he just have some sense of shame that prevented him from stooping. Why don't they raise andy warhol from the dead and make him do their cover art?

And I hate them for bringing back the brown leather jackets.
And for being named Julian.
And because they breathe my air.
And their dirty fuckhole mouths.
I need to switch to decaf.
the W to the Yzo

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

Don't really like them, but anyone who nails ad bags on cops is cool by me!

Anonymous (October 1, 2002)

damn i hate when fashion takes on music. Music has nothing to do with fashion. I see all of these kids wearing their strokes/hives haircuts now and their clothes....it's like ,wear what you want, not what someone else tells you to wear. Hell, just give me a pair of gym shorts and a white shirt and im fine.

waste_elite (October 1, 2002)

contrary to popular punk opinion, i dig the strokes. sure julian is no lou reed, but i think the only reason he draws comparisons is because of his singing style. i don't think it has anything to do with his song writing abilities because, lets face it, lou reed is the fucking man. julian certainly pales by comparison. anyway, these guys are good and the nasty hype really choked out their chances of becoming respected amongst the "underground". that and the fact that they were born into wealthy families, but what kind of control do you have over something like that. ok fuck it, im going to bed.

maverick (September 30, 2002)

Every song on this album is a potential single.

I love this disc.

-Scott

Anonymous (September 30, 2002)

good review, more fair than I would have been.

This is an actual conversation I was privy to in a Borders bookstore.

"Have you heard of the strokes?"
"No, what are they like?"
"Their like led zeppelin and classic rock....but now....."

I hate the strokes because while the hives and so on are riding a supposed "garage rock revival" I don't understand how the strokes fit into that. I don't think their garage rock. The hives ROCK. The International noise conspiracy ROCK. Randy ROCKS. The strokes sort of plod and bop, and not in a proletarian bop kind of way. If those 4 bands played together at one time, the strokes would be rocked off the stage.

And I can't walk outside without hitting someone wearing their shirt while also wearing their haircut.

On a brighter side, my dads clothes which Ive been wearing for 8 years of uncool finger pointing and economic necessity are finally cool. Thanks strokes, thanks alot.
wyzo

Contests

Exclusive Streams

Newest Reviews

Punknews.org Team

Other Places to Go