I have mixed feelings about doing this review, but I kinda feel I have to. I have some points that need making. My apologies go out to Sophie and the Giants – in the normal course of events I would simply ignore you, but it would appear that you’re going to get caught in the crossfire a little. Bit of luck no-one reads this blog. Anyway, I am a little behind the times, I should have reviewed this job application for a job in plugging or public relations a couple of months back.
Rating – 0/15,000
Rating system explained – Only people who give ratings get ratings. The first number is always a zero, and the bottom number is how many lines I would give them were I their teacher and they’d handed the crap in as homework. “I must not give bands ratings cos it if fucking fucking fucking fucking pointless” x 15,000. Get the fuck on with it. Besides, when you’re doing PR it is even less appropriate to give a rating than when you are doing a review. Which gets me onto a pretty key point. Why on earth is this website called thnksfrthrvw not thnksfrthpr/mktng/plggng? Why would you risk being decried as a shit reviewer when you’re actually a decent aspiring PR?
I will start with my comments on the tags. In the post-truth world we live in “Talented“, “Experimental“, “Clever“, “Rock” are perfect descriptions of SATG. “Hard Rock” might be utter bullshit but you might as well say it after all some brain-dead clusterfuck of a human might buy it and buy into SATG as a result. But it is so far from the truth its post-post-truth isn’t it? If Sophie and the fucking Giants are fucking “Hard Rock” then I am Beelzebub’s 48 ft long (when flaccid) penis and I fly through space propelled by the songs featured in the hit cartoon series “My Little Pony”. My Little Pony is actually surprisingly good, probably my second favourite TV programme at the moment after the quite incredible Almost Naked Animals. For those of you that haven’t seen it Almost Naked Animals is about a dog called Howie who runs a hotel and loves doing stunts. Howie is smelly and stupid (I relate a lot to Howie, I think it might be because I once met someone who was smelly and stupid, I can’t think of any other reason why I would) and has a friend called Octo who is a scaredy-(octo)-puss who is always inking himself. Bunny is PMTastic. Narwhal is a fine lounge singer, Duck is just… Duck. You really need to check out Duck. I wish I had a friend like Duck. Not the Duck from Sarah and Duck however, that Duck is a bit boring, though Sarah seems pretty chilled. I wouldn’t mind hanging out with her, only I’d probably get accused of being a paedo even though she’s a cartoon and I am real. Or am I? Maybe I am a bot writing this, but bots are real too (apart from the ones who aren’t, obvs) so am I a real bot or am I am non-real bot or am I human, or am I a chancer? You are fucking chancers, Flowers et al, and literally the only relatively good thing about your abysmal band is your silly jackets which make me laugh.
Anyway, to the point. The best episode is probably the one where Howie gets fed up with waiting for his birthday, so he gets Duck to speed up time, which is great, apart from his birthday goes even faster than it comes, and his friends start getting pissed off as their hair and teeth fall out, they get wrinkly and their joints ache.
So, lets do this, line by line.
After a storming set at this year’s Always The Festival 2016, Sophie and The Giants’
Always the Festival? You sure? As someone who was not there I can promise all my readers that Sophie and the Giant’s set at Always the Sun was not “storming“, however storming is the right word for a PR to use to describe all live sets, so perfect. It as unchallenging female-led indie-pop made by competent musicians with no imagination or passion, but obviously you’re a decent PR so you’re not going to say that. Factual inaccuracy abounds in this puff-piece, but that’s the intension and its well done.
continue their winning streak with a set at The Star Inn in aid of Oxfam.
If 4th on the bill at the fucking Star in fucking Guildford (I love the Star and I quite like Guildford too, but…) is SATG’s “winning streak” then I really fear for them when their luck turns for the worse. Surely as a PR you should be emphasizing their upward trajectory, not implying that this is them at their peak?
Since their set not so long ago at The Boileroom in May, the band have changed a lot. Which is weird, considering how good they were from the get go.
“Not so long” or “May“. Not both. Why would a band who were so good change so much? My guesses are – “they haven’t” or “they weren’t that good to start with”, or both. But from a PR point of you your words do make sense. PR is about a pointless spouting of bollocks and it is bollocks you are spouting.
Their sound was always full to begin with, but somehow they’ve managed to create such a louder sonic experience in their live set now, that you can only hope will be a main priority to be captured in the studio too.
The Boileroom is a wonderful wonderful venue, but what you have just experienced is a louder and better sound at the Star. Nothing to do with SATG. Fact-a-fucking-mooooondogdo.
With a line-up change that’s really brought a more dynamic sound into the mix,
The Boileroom is a wonderful wonderful venue, but what you have just experienced is a louder and better sound at the Star. Nothing to do with SATG. Fact-a-fucking-starship-enterprise-captain-kirk-are-you-listening-to-me-spock-are-you-there-why-why-why-girl-from-mars-by-ash. Hic.
the Guildford four piece have extended their sound from safe, melodic guitar led indie,
So they play “safe melodic guitar led indie” and you went to see them a second time. Of course you did, you’re their PR / applying for a job in PR. Even so it’s like saying “I was asked to review the Alt-J album and after listening to the first song I listened to the second”. Actually, it’s like listening to the first one which no Alt-J reviewer should ever do, unless, perhaps they are going to kill themselves before they do. That said I really enjoyed SATG’s new single “Matches” which has moved beyond “safe melodic guitar led indie” and is basically a bizarre minimal techno / metalcore / medieval-folk hybrid made using nothing but rocks from space as percussion and whale noises fed through a box of frosties for melody. Back to the point – if you’re their PR and are just going to do your job and chat shit you really don’t need to have your ears polluted by actually listening to them do you? Why did you go?
to near hard-hitting psychedelia – even showcasing power vocals against Marmozets-esque jagged, gritty hard rock breakdowns with the cathartic ‘I’m Fine’.
Sophie and the Giants are to psychedelia what McFly are to hardcore punk. If they’re hard-hitting then my bottom is an expressway to yr Catskills. FACT-A-MUNDO. Newsflash – I have just made the mistake of listening to a small clip from the show and it would appear that there may have been elements that were quite hard-hitting and a little psychedelic. Like all good critics I will ignore this fact and simply re-iterate that you are talking nonsense. Good nonsense that PRs are paid to write I hasten to add, not the sort of nonsense a shit music critic might write.
“A new found confidence beams from their live performance too, with singer/guitarist Sophie Scott playing facing opposite bright blue haired bassist Bailey Stapledon, and lead guitarist Ciaran Walsh consumed with the music, playing yearning guitar solos at the edge of the venue’s stage.”
“Facing” or “Opposite“. Not both. The new found confidence was probably a confidence that the audience could hear them properly. When you say Ciaran was “playing yearning guitar solos” [no idea what they are, but they sound really horrible to listen to – mark deducted for that] “at the edge of the venue’s stage” why did you not say “playing yearning guitar solos with his back to the wall at the rear of the stage”. Both mean exactly the same thing in a venue this big (small). Besides, what is so great about being on the edge of the stage? I once saw a band called Employed to Serve and their wonderful singer Justine (definitely less grating than Sophie’s voice) went INTO THE CROWD TO SING… can you imagine something as mega-batshit-crazy-assed than that? Still, not the strongest bit of your press release but I have to accept that it does kinda work as PR.
[As an aside, I heard that when you wanked off someone called ‘Bailey’ a shot of Baileys shot from their spam javelin. I might even start hanging round street corners offering BJs for a fiver in the hope I get a bloke with the right name, though when I last did that I never got any Baileys so maybe I was lied to or there are simply so few people called Bailey that you can suck off a shit load of men and still not get drunk. Or maybe since he dyed his hair you get a double, half Bailey’s and half blue curacao. That would be filth. Never mix the two. Bailey’s should be served in the form of the double BMW – double Bailey’s, double Malibu, double Whiskey. The drink of Kings. The only way to drink blue curacao is in a “Prince of Darkness” which is basically a shit load of vodka and malibu and orange juice and anything else you can get your hands on, with a dash of cranberry juice and some blue curacao to turn it black.] A Prince of Darkness is the drink of Princes.
“The future only holds good things for this band. They’ve managed to cleverly encompass everything people want from a rock band. They’re poppy and tame enough to be enjoyed by casual listeners, but their experimental nature crossed with their sheer talent means die-hards love them too. Each song is so well structured with classic pop song structures, but drenched in sounds, feelings and lyrics that you can’t really pinpoint on anything else.”
I have never read so much nonsense in all my life, but I have to say well done, some people are likely to buy it. Factual accuracy – negative. Half-decent PR – affirmative. I shall highlight the factual inaccuracies which in no way should be taken as criticism of your abilities in PR.
(1) They are a decidedly average and exceptionally boring band who seem to think that competent musicianship is a good substitute for personality or passion. It is not. They are going nowhere fast, and that is a promise. Personally I would not review SATG because I avoid slating local no-hopers (unless they are rascist or sexist or otherwise ask for it). I’ll only review shit big bands like U2 and Alt-J and Radiohead. But this is not a review of SATG, it’s a review of a PR piece because I want to be THANKED. It is a fact that the whole point of a review is so you can get thanks by the person you are reviewing afterwards. Jasleen – you are not bad at PR and I expect thanks for telling you this. Just to make things clear.
(2) They are not clever and they do not encompass a single thing that I want from a rock band.
(3) They are tame, I’ll give you that.
(4) What is a die-hard? Please point me to a song or part of a song that demonstates either their experimental nature or their sheer talent.
(5) “Each song is so well structured with classic pop song structures, but drenched in sounds, feelings and lyrics that you can’t really pinpoint on anything else.” Nope, absolutely no idea WTF you are on about, though I must admit that if they are a band whose songs are drenched in “sounds” then I really ought to check them out. I have spent far too long listening to nothing but bands whose influences were 4’33” by John Cage. Full stop.
(6) They are boring indie-pop for boring people of all ages. I should say for boring old farts, but the best I can work out is the current younger generation has a big “boring” problem too.
(7) “Their sound was always full to begin with, but somehow they’ve managed to create such a louder sonic experience in their live set now”. IT. IS. THE. VENUE.
And another thing. The song Lord Knows. It’s not too bad actually, SATG are not that bad really if you’re into that kind of thing. Which I REALLY am not.
And back to the fucking tags. Sophie Scott, not Sophie Scorr. HTH. Perhaps proof reading is not a good fall-back opton if PR doesn’t work out.
TLDR – not bad, you do have a future in PR, but why on earth would you risk someone erroneously thinking that anything you do bears any relationship whatsoever to a review by virtue of your website name? A review and PR are completely different things, and were I to judge your PR work as a review I would have to be extremely critical.