Patent Pending

Patent Pending: Save Each Other, The Whales Are Doing Fine.Save Each Other, The Whales Are Doing Fine. (2006)
WPO Records

Reviewer Rating: 2

User Rating:

Contributed by: AnchorsAnchors
(others by this writer | submit your own)
Published on August 18th 2006I'm almost 20, and I still absolutely love pop-punk as if I were still 14. I don't care, I'll say it, I'll admit it. I realize the immature and musically basic stigma that the music carries, and again -- I don't give a fuck. The Ataris, New Found Glory, Sum 41, all have an uncanny knack for writing .

I'm almost 20, and I still absolutely love pop-punk as if I were still 14. I don't care, I'll say it, I'll admit it. I realize the immature and musically basic stigma that the music carries, and again -- I don't give a fuck. The Ataris, New Found Glory, Sum 41, all have an uncanny knack for writing killer pop-punk tunes. Simple and fun, that's all I ask.

Where pop-punk gets into troublesome territory, is when it tries to be too much. I don't want to hear horrible screaming amidst multi-part harmonies about failed high school romances. Save that crap for the next Senses Fail record.

This is where Patent Pending run into trouble. At the base, they do what all good pop-punk bands should -- write catchy songs. They'll make you bob your head, tap your foot, and remember that time in 5th period lunch that Ashley spilled her chocolate milk on Bobby because he took Holly to the Winter Dance. Oh man was that a riot. Point is, pop-punk recalls innocence. A time where you didn't demand much from the musicians you loved, and that's just what I want to hear, despite my age.

"Los Angeles," the fiery opening track, has an absolutely infectious rhythm and vocals to match, the band's vocalist having a delivery sounding tailor made for this type of music, and his relentless energy really helps to sell a good number of these songs. But as I mentioned before, the band does run into problems with the screaming vocals. Lightly sprinkled in the background throughout the song's duration, they finally come to the forefront at the end of the track, acting in a counterproductive manner to the playful sound that had been established thus far. A recurring issue, it also effects the otherwise solid "Demo for Dana" and "Decemberween," among others. But it's listening to a song like "Lights Out in Mississippi" that makes it the clearest what could be if the aggressive vocals were dropped from these songs altogether. They feel more fun, more pure, and in this genre, that makes all the difference.

The rest of the record is a real hit or miss as to what songs are bogged down by the inclusion of the poorly delivered screaming, and what songs are just solid pop-punk jams. Because of this back and forth, it also becomes difficult to retain a solid ebb and flow. Two good songs, one bad, one good, three bad, it's like an unwelcome musical grab bag. The last strike against it, is that it's 45 minutes long, and while that doesn't seem to be anything extenuating, that's still a lot of time for this type of music.

Records like this or not, I'll continue to love pop-punk, hopefully for years to come. It's just fun, honest music that makes these warm summer nights just that much better. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a drive to make, and a Blink-182 record to listen to.

Login to rate this album

People who liked this also liked:

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.

Scruffy (August 22, 2006)

I don't know why I thought of it, but you should float out of here on Love's Forever Changes.

drewcifer (August 21, 2006)

Oh no! I'm drowning in the all the rebellion! Maybe I can float outta here on this Lovin Spoonful record.

johnnydanger (August 21, 2006)

anchors sucks

Anonymous (August 21, 2006)

nope, not aimed toward anchors, aimed at reviewer in general, who review albums that are of a genre that they don't even like, WHY BOTHER???? WHY WASTE YOUR TIME? I figure i should waste my time to get my thoughts off my chest, but blatant bad reviews is just nonsense....

insinceredave (August 21, 2006)

to the guy below me, maybe i read the the review wrong, but i'm sure anchors did say he enjoyed pop punk. oh, and great work on finding that caps lock button.

Anonymous (August 21, 2006)

I'm not gonna rate it, but I gotta say, WHY WOULD YOU RATE IT IF YOU DON'T LISTEN TO THE GENRE?!?!?? pop punk listeners should be the only ones to review it, and if you know that it is and you dont like the genre, then DON'T EFFIN REVIEW IT!!!! Thank you, have a nice day.

ConsequentialBanditry (August 20, 2006)

They used to open for many of my friends bands at Castle Golf in Centereach, Long Island, NY. They were good at their genre but unimpressive overall then, and nothing really ever changed.

Scruffy (August 20, 2006)

"Is there some quota staffers have to meet for stars? Because I see a lot of really harsh reviews. "

One would assume that the reason for that is that, when the last ten CDs you've reviewed are crap, you really, REALLY don't want to hear another crappy CD. If it sucks, it's gonna get torn a new one.

rkl (August 20, 2006)

I’m almost 20
that explains so much...

im well past the life-changing age of 20, still listening to pop-punk.. the key word there is punk. theres nothing punk about this, its just radio friendly crap.

Anonymous (August 19, 2006)

Band is the worst. Severely unimpressed by them when I saw them.

Fuzzy (August 19, 2006)

There's no "quota" for reviewers to meet except that they review what we send them. Any opinions people bring to the table are their own.

GlassPipeMurder (August 19, 2006)

True. Although I would have given it at least a 3. Is there some quota staffers have to meet for stars? Because I see a lot of really harsh reviews. Not that this was one of them, but they're out there.

burningfeeetman (August 19, 2006)

Everybody should stop giving Anchors shit. He is one of the most consistently fair and honest reviewers on here. I would totally give him a blowjob.

Anchors (August 19, 2006)

How am I hung up on age? It was just an introduction, and accounts for about three sentences.

And if you're sitting there trying to act like pop punk isn't something people always claim to 'grow out of,' you're fucking kidding yourself.

Finally, trying to be a rebel? Uh, what? Where the fuck do some of you kids pull this garbage from. Stop trying to read so much into it. The intro paragraph is exactly as it sounds, there's no hidden 'rebellious' motives, there's no hang ups, there's no carrying on.

Jesus Christ.

remainsunseen (August 18, 2006)

this band absolutely blows ass. im glad they only got a 2 stars. their ruined long island. fuckers

Scruffy (August 18, 2006)

I'm 24, and I still love pop-punk with a passion, and not as a guilty pleasure. That said, it's good pop-punk, like Screeching Weasel, Green Day, blink-182, Diesel Boy, J Church, Jawbreaker, Alkaline Trio, Smoking Popes, etc... This is the kind of pop-punk that people think of and grimace whenever I say I listen to pop-punk. This is bad. I even like Set Your Goals, but this kind of vocal, well, you have to try to sound like that, and it sounds like New Found Glory. It sounds as fake and pop-posed as Britney Spears, like they're singing all of their lyrics tongue in cheek, "look at me, I'm so witty". No thanks.