Leeds Music Scene

s/t by The Libertines

YouTube Google RSS Feed Instagram

Posted by .

Reviewed on 2nd September 2004.



By The Libertines

I swear to God. The day I finally get my wish and am sworn in as Supreme Lord of the Universe, one of the first things I will introduce is a law making it compulsory for all groups consisting of skinny white boys with guitars to do two hundred press-ups first thing on a morning to a soundtrack of "I Feel Good" and "Get Up (Sex Machine)" by James Brown. That way, the musical youth of this country of ours will go to work refreshed, pumped up and itching to make some great life-changing rock 'n' roll and all for our benefit. It'll also remove the need for me to outlaw pasty no-marks like The Libertines as they'll almost certainly simply wither and die off from lack of interest anyway.

Of course, the trendies in the national music press are happy to hype up crap like The Libertines and all their hideous spawn just as they hyped up similarly wafer-thin rubbish like the Strokes and the Yeah Yeah Yeahs three years ago - they see them as the lifeblood of the London music scene, a brave new movement singing the praises of some jaded and jingoistic notion of an "Albion" in a way that Robert Kilroy-Silk would be proud of. Let me tell you kids, those hacks are feeding you the same sort of dogshit as Tony Blair was when he was going on about a "New Britain" after the 1997 general election.

This then, the second Libertines album, is 30 minutes of pure abject whiny defeatism, the equivalent of listening to the skaghead slumped outside the pub at closing time before someone carts him off to the YMCA going on about how "oh life's screwed me over, fuck it, why bother fighting what we can't change, I'll just accept my lot". It's there in the negative song titles - "Can't Stand Me Now", "Last Post On The Bugle", "Road To Ruin", "Whatever Became Of The Likely Lads". It's there in the sloppy playing and half-arsed vocals where Carl Barat sings like a dog at last orders in the pub while the rest of his band play like they've just fallen into the dustbins outside. It's there in the way that, like it's ludicrously over-rated predecessor, it sounds like it was recorded in a coal shed on a budget of about 26p. It is the sort of record which, frankly, sums up everything that is wrong with the music scene today (see also Razorlight, Selfish Cunt and all their loathsome ilk) - sloppy, half-arsed and wilfully underachieving. Christ, is it really any wonder 70% of the nation's youth are turning to the laughable gangsta rap/R&B-loving "chav" lifestyle if this is the best the alt scene has to offer?

Listen lads, we know life is tough. But really, what exactly is the point of sitting about moping at your reflection and wallowing in your own cesspit when you could get out, get angry and search for the answers as to why your life is so tough? That's what made groups like the Pistols and the Clash such great punk bands and it's what makes The Libertines a load of vacant sterile pisswater in comparison.

Two lessons you can learn from this record. Firstly, on this evidence skag really does screw up your songwriting skills (though arguably Barat and his comrade in dull grey mediocrity Pete Doherty never really had much of those to begin with) - just say no kids. Secondly, in a world which has seen genuine bright new hopes like Franz Ferdinand and the Futureheads (both from a long way outside the capital natch) crash on the scene making genuinely exciting art-skool music in recent months, The Libertines are a truly pitiful excuse for a band in anyone's language.



All replies to this article. Log in to post a reply.

On 2nd September 2004 at 09:49 Anonymous 251 wrote...

What a brilliant and accurate review! Huzzah!


On 2nd September 2004 at 12:35 Anonymous 2600 wrote...



On 2nd September 2004 at 13:26 Anonymous 1944 wrote...

Wasn't 1 star a bit generous?


On 3rd September 2004 at 10:17 Anonymous 30 wrote...

Personally I thought it was the most biased objective lacking rant I've read in a while - everyone is entitled to their opinion but a review that reaks of making a statement rather than reviewing a record is a bit low. It is no better than prats at the other end of the spectrum who write the hyped up drivel in the NME. I would much rather have read a review about the music than listened to Andy let off steam. Like it or not The Libertines are here to stay because there is bugger all else in the music business that makes for exciting press. Journalists don't have to listen to highly paid PR people making up lies about their artists when they have the real deal who are living it straight from the pages of "How to self destruct in 3 easy steps". If we had lambasted a local unsigned band in this manner can you imagine the back lash? This discussion section would have been filled with people targetting LMS for it's poor journalism. As I said it's each to their own but a review of the record and not the hype surrounding it would have been nice.


On 3rd September 2004 at 12:13 Anonymous 904 wrote...

Shit review.

They're not my most favourite band in the world but I've got the album and I quite like it. (That's just my opinion though.)

You obviously don't like them whatsoever and have just ranted on how much you don't like them!

Wrong person reviewing this album I think.


On 3rd September 2004 at 15:11 Anonymous 3193 wrote...

I don't think it's a requirement to have to like a band in order to review them otherwise everything would get a good write-up....and what good would that do?!

Andy obviously thinks the band are built on hype and their "rock an' roll" (or not as the case may be) personal problems....hell, they even wrote songs about them...so surely they deserve everything they get.


On 3rd September 2004 at 15:47 Anonymous 251 wrote...

I thought the review was sound, yes it was a rant but it made the points as to why they are such a goddman awful band. Nice that someone has actually realised it at last. I wouldn't have reviewed it in the first place though. The sooner Doherty disappears the better with his "oooh look I can write all weird words and I'm very arty and mentally unstable". No son, you're a cock who can't play guitar or sing so you thought you'd do smack and talk rubbish to appear interesting to the tabloids. They are the musical equivalent of Big Brother contestants.
I can't think of a worse band ever, I seriously have never heard songs so bad, played so badly, even that fucking Merchandise bag of wank I got the other week.


On 3rd September 2004 at 15:48 Anonymous 251 wrote...

I'm not really an angry person.


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:06 Anonymous 1944 wrote...

Well said Mr Q. It's fair to say that the libertines are pretty dire. I keep reading reviews where they are praised for not being able to play their instruments. So if you want the NME to hail you as the next big thing just get a tape player, a mic, press record and start rubbing your guitar on your groin. Worked for me.


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:21 Anonymous 904 wrote...

You're not a fan then Mike?


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:21 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

Some fair points but a large dose of hypocrisy as well. To slam the Libertines because of the hype and then name check the Pistols is a bit rich as is slating their 'sloppy playing' and then namechecking the....er....Pistols, slagging off the lyrics and mentioning the Pistols is also a mite brow-raising.


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:28 Anonymous 13 wrote...

I thought the review said quite a lot about the music (to the extent that the Liberitines are a music act at all) Surely, their performance and their recording invite personal involvement - so a personal rant is exactly the right kind of response. An attempt to describe the music would simply dry up after a sentence or two, because there's so little to write about.


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:57 Anonymous 904 wrote...

Well each their own then. I personally think they're very listenable to with plenty of stuff to write about.

Most of LMS contestants(that's not the right word btw but it sounds nice!) really don't like them, or that's the vibe anyway! I reckon it's probably cause their frontman is just a bit of a tosser, which is fair comment.

Now, where's my Gary Glitter album?!


On 3rd September 2004 at 16:58 Anonymous 904 wrote...


I don't own any Garry Glitter.


On 4th September 2004 at 21:20 Anonymous 3048 wrote...

I would consider this a commentary on a person's individual view, which will be shared by many and opposed by many, on the influences and writing techniques of music.

There is a market for every kind of music and because this pleb doesn't like it he went out of his way to feign a "review" to air his dirty laundry, which I think is a bit sad really.

Ironically he, in some twisted way, put the Libertines album out there for people to laugh at. I bought the album and it's listenable, it's not a masterpiece but by no means is it "everything that's wrong about the music business".

I bet this reviewer has, and will continue to, dance to the Libertines in clubs.


On 5th September 2004 at 02:58 Anonymous 251 wrote...

There is a market for all types of music. There is not a market for smack heads trying to push drugs on young kids which is what this cunt does. The songs are shit. They are played like shit. The records are shit. The band are shit. Hence why they have a record deal and the NME love them.


On 5th September 2004 at 12:24 Anonymous 3193 wrote...

I also think it's rather sad that you "UpAllNight" seem to take offence at anyone on this site that differs with your single-minded opinion. So the guy who wrote the review is a pleb, because he slated a band you like...big fucking wow.

What makes you think people like Andy are so emotionaly attached to the likes of the Libertines? He got hold of the LP, he thought it was dog shit..end of story. Go to another site where everybody thinks like you and we'll all be happy.


On 5th September 2004 at 16:33 Dave LMS wrote...

There's an NME album listening post, and so far I'm on track 7. I rather like the current single - track 1 - but the rest has so far washed over me as being rather pants... I've not been much of a fan myself to be fair, although I did like their debut single and one of the other songs they released. But I've been a bit "meh" about the rest of their stuff/this album... I don't think I'd have awaded as little as one star, but they wouldn't have a good review for this from me, not by a long shot... I think Andy has this one nailed.


On 6th September 2004 at 14:39 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

Ha Ha Mike Q - trying to push drugs on young kids - thats a cracker.

Could there be a better ANTI-DRUGS icon than Monsieur Doherty who is the walking embodiment of the message, 'Take Drugs - get kicked out of band and go to prison'.

Additionally, your point, that getting signed and being liked by NME means you are shit, is nothing short of hilarious.

For starters it would make Leeds own quirky (and ruddy bloody brilliant) popsters Kaiser Chiefs shit and a arseload of other acts I could name.

The NME does talk some toss I admit and the constant banging on about Carl and Pete Libertine in said rag is wearing to say the least - as is the endless sycophancy surrounding a man who is ruining his own life and constantly disappointing those who feed his addiction by buying his records and attending his gigs - Nevertheless Mike your bitterness towards the music industry is less worn on your sleeve and more worn on a sodding great sandwich board.

You display some noticable hypocrisy too consdering many of the bands you champion have been aggressively buggering people's wallets for Donkey's years by peddling lazy, half-assed, pedestrian genero-rock.


On 6th September 2004 at 15:23 Anonymous 1944 wrote...

Bon Jovi?


On 6th September 2004 at 15:27 Anonymous 30 wrote...

All together now..."it's a sh*t bus...."


On 6th September 2004 at 15:28 Anonymous 30 wrote...

That's "business" not "Bus" by the way...darn this interweb


On 6th September 2004 at 15:49 Anonymous 251 wrote...

Hmmm Mr Laxton. Bon Jovi though worked hard to build a fanbase through constant touring. The music today may not be as great as it once was but it sells because they earned their fanbase, a fanbase that was interested in the music and that retains a loyalty unlike people who's favourite band changes frequently, depending on who the music press darlings are. The Libertines wouldn't know a decent song if it got pumped into their vein through a hyperdermic needle.

I am glad the NME love the Kaiser Chiefs, at least it shows they do have some taste then. They love Ryan Adams too at the moment. However I recall they used to like the Stereophonics. There's always a backlash cos thats just how the NME is.

And I'm sorry, but if passing a crack pipe round to a load of impressionable fans in a dressing room isnt advocating drug use I dont know what is?

It's great to have people acting a bit rock n roll but I do like them to at least be able to write songs too. When Ryan Adams is off his face he can still sing and play, he even turns up to gigs too. Pete Doherty plays up to the 'so hard done by, repressed introvert addict' routine with his nonsense ramblings that are supposedly poetic. Seriously, they can't play their instruments or sing, or write a half decent song. If it weren't for the circus that Doherty's life is at the moment nobody would be interested. Unfortunately the NME have chosen to embrace them rather than ignore them.


On 6th September 2004 at 15:52 Anonymous 251 wrote...

And I'm not bitter toward the music industry. There are plenty of great labels and artists out there. Sadly as none of them are 'cool' enough you've probably not listened to any of them.

Image is important but there's got to be some musical substance there too.


On 6th September 2004 at 16:38 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

I've probably not listened to them as none of them are 'cool' eh?

Interesting accusation considering you know utterly nothing about my music taste (including nothing about whether or not I like the Libertines music - incidentally I haven't even heard the new album).

What is also interesting to note is that I own two Charly Six singles - dunno what that says - do you? You lot presumably were 'cool' enough to be in my collection.

Wasn't necessarily referring to Bon Jovi either - that was someone else not me although what I said does apply to them.

Of course their hard work early on is commendable but your comment
'Their music may not be as great as it once was' says it all and is exactly why i said what i said.

Who's to say the Libertines didn't work for their (smaller) fanbase?

Anyway - don't give me this loyalty shit - how loyal is it of a band to its 'loyal' fans to release any old crap safe in the knowledge that their loyal fans will snap it up straight away.

And why should fans be loyal to a band that are going through the motions and releasing rubbish anyway?

Buying something because the band are media darlings is wanky I agree but so is buying something on the strength of a band's name alone.
The Stereophonics were indeed liked by the NME (and me) but then started to realise trundling crap and were rightly slated. What was their reaction - 'Mr Writer' - the definition of a dummy being spat out.

They continued to then release soulless, lazy dirge (Have a Nice Day - la la la la la la la la - eat your heart out Dylan) and have been slated ever since - again quite rightly.

The main annoyance being that they showed great potential and released some cracking stuff but chose to live on Bland Street instead of Spiky Rock Avenue.

Not heard about the passing of the crack pipe and i would take it with a heavy pinch of salt to be honest.

As for your other Doherty points - I agree - he is a cock and I'm not defending him(bang on with the 'hard done by' victim comment) but there was plenty of interest in the Libertines before the circus began I can assure you.


On 6th September 2004 at 17:03 Anonymous 251 wrote...

What I am saying is that 20 years from now will the Libertines still be selling records? Probably not. Some of their fans may still have crack addictions though after Mr Doherty introduced them to his crack pipe.

I liked the Stereophonics when I first heard them, they had some nice pop songs. They've matured and written better ones now, but thats not what the British public seems to want. It gets classed as bland if it holds some thought or meaning. We know what we like and we'll stick to it thanks. Which is why our charts are so full of crap and why in America you get the same old crap yet can have a country artist at no. 1 one week, a rap star the next, some metal the week after and so on. 'More Life...' was a fine pop song and helped hook me in but it was the lure of 'Local Boy..' that really attracted me, the fact that a British songwriter was writing stories in songs again. I'd much rather play 'Lying In The Sun' than 'Last of The Big Time Drinkers. I guess it's that I have always enjoyed music with lyrics that seems to put me in a minority.

The crack pipe story came from a Libertines fan who was there and very disappointed to say the least.

And as for loyalty, sometimes when you've earned it then people will stick with you through the bad times, rather than just abandon you. Maybe help you re-discover your old self.
I dislike the Libertines because it's just poor. Poor songs, poorly played, poorly put together. As you mention about the strenghth of a name selling records...how do you think their album is at number one? Musical quality? I think not.
By the same token people don't buy Bon Jovi or Stereophonics reords because of the name.

My apologies for your defensive stance on the Libertines making me cast assumptions on your musical tastes.


On 7th September 2004 at 09:37 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

Hold on a second, what meaning does 'Have a Nice Day' have or a piss poor cover of Handbags and Gladrags.

When Stereophonics released Local Boy (the first time- their debut release) - I was straight down my local Our Price and I class it as one of my best purchases but they plummeted swiftly downhill to my disappointment as I thought they had a great (in musical terms rather than financial) future ahead of them.

They haven't written anything good for ages they release bland directionless dogshit which is exactly what the British public DO want hence why sales of recent 'Phonics material sells by the truckload.

The British public want to be spoonfed MOR knackers and told what to like - which is why our charts are so full of crap.

Thankfully decent music survives because of the minority of people who actually have a music taste - whatever it may be and are passionate.

You and me for example - who although disagreeing here are passionate enough about music to do so.

...and no the Libertines won't even be selling (well maybe a few but certainly not making) records in two years - as Doherty will either be dead or well on the way.

I like the Libertines by the way, I like the way they make me feel, I like the fact that its a bit 'wayward' and chaotic and I like the confessional, humourous lyrics.

I also understand why people dislike them and I realise that the musicianship isn't exactly great. However I don't think the latter is the be all and end all - music is there to entertain, excite and generate a positive feeling - if we can appreciate it because of the skill then brilliant but there are other ways to appreciate it.

....I also reckon Gary is a half decent sticksman as well.


On 7th September 2004 at 10:31 Anonymous 1200 wrote...

"Thankfully decent music survives because of the minority of people who actually have a music taste"

- You are an elitist too eh? Seems to be a few of you knocking around here.

Please don't slag off the whole world then put yourself on a higher level, it makes you sound like a snob.

A love of music is not something everyone is afforded a chance to have, but you can sit here and write reviews about people-like-you to be read by people-like-you, or maybe you could spread your musical horizons a bit, and in doing so spread other people's too.

This review by the way is awful - I wouldn't know the Libertines if they slapped me in the face, as I don't watch telly or read the NME (it's a good way of avoiding both shit music and elitism at the same time), and I still wouldn't. I would however be able to recognise the reviewer, which is clearly the point. That kind of ranting is fine, but you could actually just review the CD and be a bit more subtle about the other wider points, and they would have much greater effect.


On 7th September 2004 at 10:34 Anonymous 251 wrote...

I think Handbags and Gladrags is more a comment on the music buying society as a whole and the record labels. Same thing with Counting Crows and Big Yellow Taxi. You do a cover of something for your own pleasure and it becomes your biggest hit. I think they have written some great stuff, I was brought up on Motown so I love all the harmonies and I also like the Black Crowes who clearly influenced the last album heavily. 'Have a Nice Day' is a happy little pop song, but the lyrics are the revers, I like that. It's the Warren Zevon thing, give someone a happy little tune and see if they notice you're singing about digging up the bones of your ex-girlfriend who you murdered. 4 albums in I wouldn't want another More Life... I do like how you can link back to Billy Davey's Daughter though or take Goldfish Bowl and see how that has grown into stories about life outside of Cwmamman after 6 years on the road.

The Libertines just hold nothing for me. I'd rather bang on some New York Dolls or Replacements, listen to something new by Paul Westerberg or check out people like Pete Yorn or Jesse Malin who are energetic and exciting.

Velvet Revolver, Aerosmith etc, bands who have done it, have the huge image and rely on the press and the notoriety of everything but at the end of the day if you don't have the tunes to cut it you will fade away.

White Light Motorcade and Hundred Reasons may have been dropped but I reckon they'll still be going long after The Libertines have gone because in a short space of time they have given fans music that will stand the test of time.

The Libertines are just a passing whim who may seem important to people now but as soon as people get bored of them there will be someone else to take their place.


On 7th September 2004 at 10:40 Anonymous 1200 wrote...

They don't seem important to me.


On 7th September 2004 at 11:23 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

I think they have made a big impact though and will still be talked about for years to come - not necessarily for music reasons exclusively.

We're squarely in 'matter of taste' territory now though, I hate the 'Phonics recent stuff and you like it which is all that can be said on the matter I suppose.

I'm not convinced you will fade away without the tunes though - U2 are living proof.

Look at the Pistols - they were hardly great musicians and did have an abundance of material but they are still talked about today.

I'm not comparing them as a band and in terms of future 'importance' but there are parallels that can be drawn.

Mr Chimp - I wasn't meaning to be elitist and I assure you I wasn't putting it in a 'world' context either. I understand that purchasing the latest Mojave 3 album isn't on the priority list of your average Sudanese refugee but thats not what I'm saying.

I did say 'whatever that may be' - what I should have said perhaps was people who are passionate about music - which my surrounding statements allude more to. People with a music taste buy music - the number of singles bought in the charts indicate that not many people are doing that nowadays.

By saying 'taste' though I'm saying that the charts are full of records that people buy because thats all they know and not because they particularly like it - I reckon that if Radio One/Aire etc played the next Napalm Death record once an hour and said it was amazing people would buy - I exaggerate of course but many of the record buying public are sheep.

OK it was badly worded to say 'decent music survives' but its difficult to articulate. You too in fact display elitism by saying the TV and NME is full of shit music. Therefore are you not putting yourself on a higher level than a TV watching NME reader?

Anyway, why am I putting myself on a higher level - who's to say that someone who loves music is a better person than someone who doesn't.

And what do you know about my music taste and its width (apart from the fact that I like the Libertines and don't like Bon Jovi/recent Stereophonics/Pistols), what do you know about my musical horizons and reviews by me for people like me.

FYI in my short time as a reviewer - and I'll wager you know nothing about my reviews I have reviewed Hardcore metal, comedy rock, pop, industrial, indie, funk and whatever else I can get my grubby mitts on (mostly favourably) - yeah there are genres not covered but I try to broaden my horizons. Therefore I slightly resent your accusation.

God I got defensive there.....


On 7th September 2004 at 11:49 Anonymous 251 wrote...

So are you saying U2 don't have the tunes? I was never really that into them but had an obsessive mate and and my bro and some of his friends were into them. After a re-visit I discovered how awesome they actually are, they have written some amazing songs.

Sadly whenever I listen to any Libertines it just makes me cringe at how anyone can think it sounds good enough to put in a shop and amazes me that people buy it. People I know and love like this stuff and it breaks my heart. They are truly awful, Ant and Dec were better.

My music tastes started firmly in a Motown upbringing with some country being played, I never really took much notice then but looking back I can see how that has shaped my chosen instrument and musical tastes somewhat. I'm always eager to follow links between bands and follow the principle that if I like Y then I will probably like X also. It's not always the case but has led to some interesting links and discoveries. However, Adam Duritz, Ryan Adams, Jon Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, Mick Jagger and Bob Dylan could all come out and champion The Libertines and I still wouldn't get them. I can't understand how making shit music and not being able to sing or play is somehow cool and good.
3 chords, a good voice and some good lyrics I get. Being shit I don't understand.

The NME do feature some good bands, bands I like and love. But on the whole it is written by people more concerned with themselves than the written word. Kerrang is going the same way judging by my own recent experience with one of their journalists too.


On 7th September 2004 at 11:52 Anonymous 1200 wrote...

Well that's great, nice one, sorry. You like lots of kinds of music. However, you can't accuse Joe Public of being blind to good music while you, as a reviewer with lots of great stuff to shout about, sit here preaching to the converted. Maybe you can correct me again - I'm eager to learn!

I don't put myself on a higher level than an NME reader, they do.


But seriously, it's just more of your sheep that you refer to. Believe me - from the outside there is very little difference between NME and Smash Hits or CD;UK or whatever. The music covered is different in style, but equally lacking in content most of the time. The pressure and impossibilty of "getting signed" drives "indie" bands to produce material so commercially-contrived that they sound just as crass as the music they hate. But it's an old story.


On 7th September 2004 at 12:00 Anonymous 13 wrote...

But the Libertines are still rubbish.


On 7th September 2004 at 12:25 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

"However, you can't accuse Joe Public of being blind to good music while you, as a reviewer with lots of great stuff to shout about, sit here preaching to the converted."

I agree to an extent but these are the kinds of places that will publish my work (although I don't actually write for LMS).

At the end of the day though we are having a discussion about music on a music forum in reaction to a review on a particular site.

I'm eager to learn - where can I get my stuff to a wider audience. Should I not be on here discussing? Should I take it to the Smash Hits forum?

I understand your point but its like discussing music in the boozer and saying - no you're preaching to the converted - go and tell it to that geezer over there at the jukebox.

And yes I do like lots of music but thats not the point i was making Mr Patronising. I was saying that you probably have no idea about my reviews (I don't sign them Laxtons Superb for starters) and can therefore not accuse me of what you did.

I agree lots of 'indie' is commercially contrived and of course the NME laps it up but they do - in fairness - pick up on some decent stuff.

I read it occasionally (and its for the most part bollocks) - not for their opinion but for their up and comers news - its one handy way for finding out about new stuff and I have found out about some (in my view) decent less commercially motivated bands that way.

The NME though desperately lacks a rival - as the old Lee and Herring sketch used to say (not about the NME but in general) - 'Lazy Boring Journalist Scum' - constantly peddling an 'X is like Y on Z' line of reviewing. But again thats an old story too.


On 7th September 2004 at 14:15 Anonymous 251 wrote...

Yes you're right, NME does lack a rival. Lets go get a small business loan and kick it's ass. You can write about The Libertines and I'll write about Bon Jovi. Between us we should cover the whole musical spectrum.

Lets call it Melody Maker or something snazzy like that....


On 7th September 2004 at 14:16 Anonymous 251 wrote...

Are you Johnny Erstaz Culture by any chance then?


On 7th September 2004 at 14:56 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

Nope - thats someone called Steve I think - don't quote me on that though. I go by my real name in my reviews.

I wish I could start an NME alternative - the world's your oyster music wise - its not like there's only indie CDs released every week is it?


On 7th September 2004 at 15:15 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

...in addition to my last post the problem is that people wouldn't buy something with a hugely broad church of music sadly so a magazine couldn't survive without appealing to the masses. This then means that you end up with bands trying to get into your pages and the commerically contrived scenario described earlier by Mr Gomm.


On 7th September 2004 at 16:22 Anonymous 251 wrote...

Kerrang has tried to embrace more music and has subsequently gone way downhill. Or maybe it's the bands?


On 7th September 2004 at 19:28 Anonymous 2538 wrote...

But has it sold more copies though?

P.S. - enjoyed the review above, although I have a sneaky feeling that it could have been written before the album ever came out! Would have been good to have got more critique on the actual songs, at least a stab at them anyway. (BTW no matter how strongly you feel I am not advising anyone attempts to stab the Libertines here). However, as a piece on the state of the music scene they clearly have made no effort to distance themselves from I see it as fair cop.


On 8th September 2004 at 07:32 Anonymous 13 wrote...

But there is nothing to write about in the Libertines' music - it's sloppy, repetitive, inept, poorly structured, embarrassing horse piss. End.


On 8th September 2004 at 08:52 Anonymous 2538 wrote...

See, that wasn't so difficult, you've made a start already! Now how about: Track one was quite fast and sloppy, repetitive, inept, poorly structured, embarrassing horse piss, track two was a bit more angsty sloppy, repetitive, inept, poorly structured, embarrassing horse piss. Track three was a sloppy, repetitive, inept, poorly structured, embarrassing horse piss ballad... etc.


On 8th September 2004 at 09:34 Anonymous 13 wrote...


ps they all use the same "tricks" (eg leave tape rolling while inept fumblings dry up towards the end of each number, or fail to play imagined solo properly but keep it in anyway becuase it sounds "authentic")


On 8th September 2004 at 11:46 Anonymous 2538 wrote...

Ahh yes, no you're coming on to one of my favourite rants. Hidden tracks. Why oh why oh why etc... If its good enough to put on the album, put it one, if it isn't leave it out. It was cool the first time, now its the norm. Dunno if this album has one, but wouldn't surprise me if it does... anyway, did someone say that this album was only half-an-hour long? Does that include the farting around at the end of the tracks? If so how much actual "music" is there? (Sam I appreciate to your ears there is none, but you know what I'm getting at!) Hardly seems to represent value for money even for the kind of people that like this sort of tripe.


On 8th September 2004 at 14:02 Anonymous 13 wrote...

Our energy and attention needs to go elsewhere ... Polly Harvey, and a fantastic band, werr magnificent last night. The University Refectory is an overpriced disgrace of a venue and we should organise a boycott. Even if htey paid you to go in it is totally unsuitable for music performences. See LMS Forum for more


On 8th September 2004 at 14:17 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

nah Rob its 42 minutes long which isn't particularly short or long. Someone is feeding you porky pies.

By the way - do you have a brother in Leeds. Saw a kid who was the spitting image of you but with big curly hair at the Kasabian HMV instore the other day.


On 8th September 2004 at 15:47 Anonymous 2538 wrote...

Bloody Hell! There's some other poor bastard who looks like me, but with curly hair?! That's even worse than having no hair! Nope, no brother I'm afraid, but if I did have I'm fairly sure they'd be nowhere near a Kasabian signing! Who are you btw Mr. Laxton, clearly you know me, but I haven't put two and two together to work out who you are??


On 8th September 2004 at 16:59 Anonymous 1227 wrote...

Oh yeah forgot I don't have my name on here.

Its Chris from Sandman....the one who was at the 'shoot' the other day


On 8th September 2004 at 18:00 Anonymous 2538 wrote...

oh right. hello. i never know who anyone is, except Mike Q coz of the obvious choices to review!


On 8th September 2004 at 18:10 Anonymous 251 wrote...

It fooled Glacken for long enough !


On 8th September 2004 at 18:16 Anonymous 1944 wrote...

I was gutted when it turned out that the reviewing genius known as Holden De Forge was just plain old mike q


On 8th September 2004 at 21:50 Anonymous 1856 wrote...

Libertines=Wank. nuff said


On 25th September 2004 at 17:50 Anonymous 3268 wrote...

"for all groups consisting of skinny white boys with guitars"

Correction, The Libertines are made up of 3 "skinny white boys" and Gary, who is black.

And this review isn't even worth reading. It's completely biased to your own dislike of them. I don't know why i even wasted my time reading it!


On 25th September 2004 at 17:53 Anonymous 3268 wrote...

"I also think it's rather sad that you "UpAllNight" seem to take offence at anyone on this site that differs with your single-minded opinion."

"Go to another site where everybody thinks like you and we'll all be happy."

How Hypocritical can you get.


On 23rd January 2005 at 19:19 Anonymous 2345 wrote...

Fair enough if the guy doesn't like them but seeing as how The Libs are such a popular band he could have at least tried to comprehend why so many people do like them. I reckon there's more than a few Libertines fans who come on this site and so to offer this kind of review is to insult what is probably a large proportion of LMS visitors' musical tastes. An objective reviewer is maybe not always available but the manner in which this CD was panned makes it as useless as if one of The Libertines were reviewing it themselves.


On 14th February 2005 at 15:19 Anonymous 1205 wrote...

Good point. How many other discussions have warranted this sort of attention? Surely an objective view on the issue would have sufficed rather than a unrepentent rant?

Ok, as the first to add this weight to the argument (which believe me, from past discussion groups is pretty unusual) I feckin love the Libertines, Babyshambles and weep everytime Mr Docherty puts ink to paper (Well maybe not). Getting into the Libertines music for me was just that, getting involved. It was all about the impromto house gigs, the sharing a druken pint with the guys after a gig, the passion they have for music, the idealist dreams of arcadia, the intelligent ramblings (and yeah, minus the drugs Peter is one of the most intelligent people I have ever conversed with)the friends I have met through the libertines. I can see so clearly how the above comments have come about and respect them all but sloppyness and chaotic, simple warblings are only half of the story.

Now Pete is just a half arsed addict who cant string a serene two seconds of his precious life together. For this I disrespect him. For his love and passion to his music I will eternally thank him.

Oh , buy the way. A magazine to spit on the pile which is the NME is a must and I only wish I had enough cash to start and have a bash myself. Anyone lend us a fiver?



1 photos • Upload a photo



1 band associated with this article.

The Libertines

Related Bands

Other bands you might like.



0 fans of The Libertines

I'm a fan