Eight Perplexed Thoughts on the Disappointing New Strokes Album

A dedicated fan scratches his head.

By Peter Malamud Smith

I've always really liked The Strokes. (I even played guitar in a not-especially-tight Strokes cover band in college.) So I've been waiting impatiently these five years for a new album from them. After a long hiatus, numerous solo albums, and a critical drubbing for their last record (which I also liked), they've finally released a new album, Angles, this week... and it's damn strange.

1. Whatever Rolling Stone may say, this is not a "return to form."

Critics who are calling Angles a return to form must have forgotten what Is This It sounded like. Angles is a lot closer to their last album, the hyperdense First Impressions of Earth, than to their simpler early stuff. Even the supposed back-to-basics statement of purpose, "Under Cover of Darkness," opens with a pileup of licks that sounds like someone faceplanting into a Guitar Center. I'm not sure it's bad, but it's not exactly "Last Nite."

Listen: "Under Cover of Darkness"

MP3

2. Angles sounds like the work of five people emailing each other musical ideas.

Which it is — apparently Julian Casablancas decided to cede his obsessive control of the songwriting, instead sending his bandmates vague instructions from a separate studio. ("Operation Make Everyone Satisfied," he called it to the Times, not sounding especially satisfied.) The results are unsurprisingly fragmented. "Two Kinds of Happiness" is punchy new-wave, until it isn't; "Taken For A Fool" has the catchiest chorus on the album, but the path it takes to get there is weirdly indirect, like they felt self-conscious about delivering the goods.

Listen: "Taken For A Fool"

MP3

3. Actually, self-conscious might be the single best adjective to use here.

This might be what happens ten years after you become the most hyped band in rock. They're starting to sound like the precocious children of helicopter parents, vamping frantically to impress. Producer Gus Oberg said, "There's many versions of each song," and really, you can almost hear the box set's worth of abandoned takes and half-ideas in here. It's understandable, but you can't get away with these mid-song left turns unless you're exuding confidence, which, at the moment, The Strokes are not.

4. …despite a few moments of spontaneous glee.

There's a moment in the opener, "Machu Picchu," when the guitars play this jaunty break that sounds like a repurposed horn part (and, per Oberg's admission, probably was at some point). It's one of the only places on this record with any feeling of abandon. Listening to a lot of the other tracks, you can convince yourself that a part is cool or at least interesting, and then some little flash of the old swagger comes through ("Machu Picchu," "Taken for a Fool"), and you remember exactly how cool and interesting the Strokes are capable of being.

Listen: "Machu Picchu"

MP3

5. They even seem to recognize the problem.

In Rolling Stone, David Fricke writes about the last track, "Life Is Simple In The Moonlight," which finds Casablancas singing "Don't try to stop us/ get out of the way." I don't hear the "snapping relish" in his voice that Fricke does; I hear someone trying to convince himself. This band sounds like they'd be pretty easy to stop. Actually, they sound like they'd be relieved.

6. In retrospect, First Impressions wasn't that bad.

I really liked it, in fact. It's too damn long, it has some bad ideas, and it loses a lot of juice on side B. But it opens with maybe the best song they've ever written, "You Only Live Once," and it ends with an undervalued gem called "Red Light," whose playful ‘70s strut Angles reappropriates less tunefully on "Gratisfaction." On the other hand, Angles is twenty minutes shorter, which is progress. Apparently Casablancas told everyone he was cutting three songs from First Impressions and then… didn't.

Listen: "You Only Live Once"

MP3

7. Maybe this band works best when one person's in charge.

The first couple of Strokes albums were dictatorships by all accounts. I'm all for democracy, but this sounds more like anarchy, and honestly, Casablancas is the most talented songwriter of the five. His underrated solo album, Phrazes For The Young, had a ton of ideas — maybe too many — but it felt like there was a single intelligence at work, moving songs like "11th Dimension" intuitively from one section to the next.

Listen: "11th Dimension"

MP3

8. I still like The Strokes.

Even when they're as lost as this, their songs have a yearning, bittersweet quality that I find touching. I want there to be another Strokes album, and I want it to be better than this one. Where they used to sound loose, but tight, they now sound directionless, but anal. Fabrizio Moretti told the Times that at the beginning, "we were trying hard to seem like it came naturally… and I think now we embrace the fact that it's hard work." Well, rock music might be hard work, but it shouldn't sound like it. Maybe these guys just need to relearn how to fake it.

Listen: "Last Nite"

MP3

 

Commentarium (25 Comments)

Mar 25 11 - 6:01pm
....

thank you. totally agree

Mar 25 11 - 9:51pm
$

it's not that bad. damn. how about "taken for a fool" and "gratisfaction"? very nice :)

Mar 26 11 - 12:24am
damgenius

And this is why I still read Rolling Stone and this is the first time I've seen your site.

Mar 28 11 - 12:17am
Mikei

My opinions are parallel to this sites review of the album. I thought Taken for a Fool was actually great though. No need to get hostile anyone! These are just our opinions, nothing harmful =]

Mar 26 11 - 3:57am
Erik Lilleby

I like comparing it to any of they're other albums. It's seems like a perfect progression. Something in the lyrics of Machu Pichu sound like Is This it. But even if people are perplexed, atleast we're talking about it. I love it too much. I've played it constantly for a week and songs like Two Kinds of Happiness and Taken For A Fool don't wear-off (Casablancas sounds like Bowie for a snippet of 'Happiness'). All in all, I'll say it's they're best album. No worries here.

Mar 26 11 - 9:52am
Bob

I listened to it once and it was more than enough. Julian's solo album was much better. The early Strokes stuff too was amazing.

Mar 26 11 - 10:27am
Get over IT

I love how people hold onto there ideas about a bands early album. I don't want to hear the same thing twice. I'm happy that the strokes are growing as a band. I just hope I don't have to wait five years for something more.

Mar 26 11 - 4:30pm
kwahn

I agree. If people want to hear the same shite over and over, go listen to Nickelback. I am wearing this album out right now, and it still interesting after several listens. I wish it were longer.

Mar 26 11 - 10:52am
Xx

Phrazes For The Young was self indulgent shit.

I think this new one might grow on me but it is not "a return to form" in any way.

Machu Picchu is just embarrassing.

Mar 26 11 - 4:05pm
Parvy

"Machu Picchu is just embarrassing."

Wrong. Dead wrong.

Mar 27 11 - 3:20pm
Christopholis

"Machu Picchu" was all right, but the embarrassing one was definitely "Two Kinds of Happiness," that shit is all over the fucking place. Song feels like it has A.D.D.

Mar 26 11 - 11:00am
Margaret

I was so excited when I first heard "Under Cover of Darkness," it sounded so upbeat and fun. It really reminded me of early Strokes. Then the rest of the album came out and I was just completely disappointed. Part of the problem is that this album was hyped as the Strokes going back to the basics, so that's what I was expecting. This album sounds nothing like Is This It and that wouldn't be a bad thing if it were any good. I didn't necessarily want a repeat of Is This It, but Angles is just too much 80s synth and I feel like the vocals and instruments are just fighting with each other the whole time. I'm glad some people like this album, but I am not one of them.

Mar 26 11 - 11:12am
@collendubose

i can dig the strokes manufactured low-fi williamsburg trust-funded2000 sound...when it is tom petty catchy and the words don't seem to matter....machu pichu sounds like they wish that they were so much more indie RATATAT w/ shitty lyrics....yet, they could come back and be the biggest thing touring- easily because they have proven they can write hooks and catchy songs again and again....just hire that CARS producer again... anyway...it's no young jeezy

Mar 26 11 - 12:04pm
Ben

As Woody Allen said:
"Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, teach gym."

But I guess with gym being cut from school budgets (along with everything else it would seem) Allen should change the saying to:

"Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, become critics."

Mar 26 11 - 12:42pm
bob

what's your point? are you just trying to say that you like this album?

Mar 26 11 - 4:08pm
O0O0

Wow Ben, you're a riot!

Mar 26 11 - 5:32pm
Yo

I love the album, but this review has many valid points, if you're a strokes fan expecting buisiness as normal. But I think they're at a point where their legacy has been solidified and their financial future is sound. So why not test the limits a bit? It is very experimental for a mainstream band, and maybe not a truly complete work, but still, there are some great tracks.

Mar 27 11 - 11:26am
PeterSmith

I hear you. I like seeing them (or any band) experiment; I just feel like the results on this particular album aren't very successful, especially compared to some of the experiments on First Impressions and Phrazes. It's not that I want them to remake Is This It every time--it's that I want their work to have the cohesion and forcefulness that Is This It had, wherever they end up going stylistically.

Mar 26 11 - 10:35pm
Get over IT

Just a suggestion for the writer. The article isn't bad, it can't be right or wrong and it certainly is valid, but you might not want to make too many references to such a well respected or well known authority on music if you are going to completely contradict it. Your opinion is fine, but you might not want to draw too much attention to the other article, because a new reader might think, 'who the he'll are you anyway?'. Just saying. Make a reference, fine. But don't set your whole article as a counterpoint to someone elses work, you would do fine with just your own observations. You already have credibility when you share that you are a fan of the band. This is my first read on your site, and I think I will be back for more.

Mar 27 11 - 1:20am
verbal

Fair but i mean Rolling stone is well known but i wouldn't exactly call it well-respected at this point.

Mar 30 11 - 3:04am
Sexy Minx

1. Rolling Stones Magazine makes there money selling advertisements from the record companies, so they have an agenda to push top-selling bands even if the "product" is only adequate. (my ex-boyfriend told me this.)
2. I loved "Is this it".
3. I paid $10 dollars so I felt like if I had keep playing "Angles" (even though my first impression of it was not good) I was sure eventually it would 'grow' on me.
4. Now I've listened to it for a solid month and absolutely hate it. None of the songs grab me, haunt me, transport me. I'm disappointed with every track and feel like a sucker for believing the Rolling Stone's review.
5. I hate Rolling Stones Magazine for being dishonest and disguising there advertisements as unbiased music reviews.
6. I'm putting the CD up for sale on eBay.

Mar 30 11 - 7:23pm
none

totally agree

Apr 02 11 - 8:59pm
$

buying it!

May 28 11 - 6:44pm
12:51

long time fan totally disapointed in this album, i hope this is the lowest they can hit ,so they can go back up from here , people who like it, don't even know that the strokes don;t like it, it's all over the place and they know it!

Jul 03 11 - 3:22pm
Mark

I am a huge The Strokes fan, I think most of all of their music has been amazing. They might be my favorite band, but just when Angles came out... I became extremely disappointed. It's just the quality of the music, it's definitely all over the place and just doesn't sound like their style to me. This doesn't feel like The Strokes, whatever they changed, I want the old Strokes back.