Someone explain this to me.
They're on the NME's cover.
Fair play.
But they're rubbish.
And haven't done anything. At all. No album, an eight-song set? RUBBISH. That single, Sheena Is A Parasite... too awful for words.
I can understand bad bands being on the cover when they've done something, BUT THIS?
Gosh, they are an awful band. Right? I'm not imagining this, right? They're interviewed by Pat Long, too. I used to love reading Pat Long's bits.
NO MORE PAT. NO MORE.
Bye.
They're a bit gash.
-
Bring back
Eighties Matchbox.
well, I guess it is the NEW Musical Express
For me, this week the NME can do no wrong.
Why?
p.18
.
oh-kay
If it hasn't left my seive-like brain by the time I go past the next WH Smiths, I'll take a sneaky look.
wow
three (two and a half maybe) "the horrors" thread on the first page of the music forum. I doubt I would have ever heard of them if people here didn't hate them so much.
(I haven't heard them yet
and I doubt i'll bother...)
Didn't Menswear gig a similar deal on the Melody Maker?
I had this feeling they were front cover before anyone had even heard a peep out of them? Am I going mad? I'm sure my mate loathed them on that basis alone...
That sounds familiar
gig == get
bleurgh.
They've always done
that though haven't they. Like when they put Terris on the cover!
Thats a shame about Pat Long, I remember in the last nme I bought he wrote a really nice review of the Icarus Line at the metro club. Then again, James Oldham used to write gushing reviews of Spiritualized and Royal Trux before he starting on about the Libertines all the time and setting up Loog.
The Horrors are going to be fucking massive....
for about 5 minutes. You can tell cos they've done fuck all and already tons of people hate them
They look fucking ridiculous like
The Horrors
..or their record company to be precise, just winged the NME a few grand, that's a fact. Tis the only reason they're there...
If I winged them a couple of grand they wouldn't put my band on the cover, though
I mean, The Horrors have clearly got a following and interest of sorts.
And if they weren't there it'd only have been p_doh again, surely?
?
they've been putting a peado on the front cover?
Arf.
They've gained a rather large following round these parts, in deepest darkest Shoreditch as I understand. I don't like them, and there moment will be fleeting at best.
Who the fuck are they
i just didn't even hear about their rise to "fame"
they look like the group of people who were outcast at school so started out haning around toilets and shopping malls in black.
Obviously
you've gotta have some degree of fame, but at the end of the day, especially in this instance, money has talked.
.
firstly no money was swung nme's way. i was suprised by their cover but the nme are genuinely pissing themselves with love.
all i want to say is that i actually respect the nme for taking a risky and opinion dividing band they love on the cover for no other reason than they really like them.
(its worth pointing out the 80's matchbox turned down a cover at a very similar point in their career)
The Horrors
are a band that represent more than a sum of their parts, doubtless.
The bands that play(ed) at Junk (RIP?) in Southend make up the type of scene that everyone with a half a left brain knows the NME adores.
The Violets, These New Puritans, Xerox Teens, Neils Children, No Bra, Errorplains, THE HORRORS. Off the top of my head. Pretty wicked set of bands, non?
And they really aren't that bad. One trick show-ponys, yes, terrible band, no.
All.
I just had a listen for the first time
and it brought a smile to my face in a good way
Sounds like the Cramps, X, Birthday Party, and Fall(though obviously not a tenth as good) a bit...at least it isnt Razorlight or the Others.
I'll pay under a tenner to see em live
though,,,
£6 would feel less wrong...
"One trick show-ponys, yes, terrible band, no."
Surely this is a contradiction in terms?
Believe you me,
money changed hands, as is most often the case nowadays...sorry to be illusion-shattering, but this is the world we live in.
That is actually bullshit.
NME suggested it. They wanted to do it. Obviously Loog weren't going to turn it down.
Well, they look shit anyway...
wtf are they? Should I care?
they look like muppets
but their music holds on its own (if you don't like it, go play cat power some more).
& they're on the nme cause of the loog connection.
the horrors
horrific.
true
i can't see them taking off outside of london. or even outside of hoxton/camden areas.
of course maybe this is a huge experiament to see how big you can get just by looking like morticians with mental health issues.
They DO NOT...
...sound like The Birthday Party, who would eat them for breakfast. They sound like the 8th track off of a dodgy Bat Cave compilation from 1983, and I expect they'll have a similar shelf life. They also sound a bit like The Meteors, which is about the most damning thing you can say about anything.
"they're on the nme cause of the loog connection"
weird. the way you say that makes it sound as if the startling nepotism isnt something the magazine's publishers should be embarassed by.
NME does this sometimes.
Like with Elastica. They got the cover after stutter. Elastica were good though.
i'm indifferent towards them.
I bet you were wanking over them
until they were on the cover.
you know everyone on here so well.
Colin - put this man in charge, STAT!
Loog records
is A&R'd by James Oldham, who used to be features ed at... NME.
COINCIDENCE?????
And your sole method of humour
is sarcasm. Always.
I think I win in this situation.
What,
because your sole method of humour is being wrong?
Times change
Eons ago NME put Gang Of Four on the cover. This was before they signed to a major label. The big labels made comlaints to the NME.
Putting the Horrors on the front cover has been done for entirely different reasons.
...
Different reasons, such as desperation ... Conor McNicholas was eulogising their greatness and his "excitement" on Radio 5 (news, sport and The Horrors) this morning. Trying to make them out to be a modern-day Sex Pistols, or the "new" Arctic Monkeys. Bollocks! The NME/James Oldham/Loog connection seems like such a cosy coincidence. But that's obviously because they all have the same great taste in music right? They're the trend setters that let the people know where it's at .... Yup, the NME - for people that judge music by what a band looks like, rather than how it sounds.
NME's publishers must be shitting themselves about the effect of the internet on the future of their titles. Their blatant attempts to create hyped acts out of average bands might help to draw-out their inevitable demise, but such is their desperation, what else to do. It's merely more blatant than in recent times because this time the band is SO bad. Be entertained ... laugh at the sinking ship. Be happy in the knowledge that when NME finally dies, at least the journalists have great credentials to get a nice job as a hair stylist. N.M.E. R.I.P. You mean NOthing.
Shoot me
I've heard that 'Sheena' song once, and I in no way hated it. It's not amazing, but it's not shit either
Good video, too
Sheena is a parasite?
Actually Sheena is a Punk Rocker. The Horrors are the parasites. And the link between loog & the NME reeks of nepotism.
bollocks- Pat Long doesn't know his arse from his fucking elbow.
They didn't mention it this time 'round, but he 'edited' the Jack White/Arthur Lee interview, and the only notable thing he did, was to call 'Hey Joe' (Hendrixes) Hey Joe, like the indie kids wouldn't know who wrote it...
it wasn't Hendrix, that's for sure...Love did it a year before him, and Billy Roberts , who wrote it, was doing it in th early sixties. You don't need to be a geek to know this information, there was a ceedee released a few years ago, that JUSt had different versions of this song on it...
bunch of intelligence fearint scenester twats
had a few drinks had we, grockle?
ha ha ha...its funny you should say that ;)
terrible...Conor Mcthingy was quoted as saying that even though they sound shit and are rich kids playing at being rock stars, there is no way parents are going to like them, so they are cool.
What UTTER tosh...being as people who would have grown up listening to punk stuff are gonna have kids old (young) enough to listen to something like the horrors now
Whats wrong with liking music 'cos its good? Does it really have to be a huge generation dividing social collossus come to save us from liking the same music as our parents?...
Also, what's wrong with rich kids being rock stars?
I've never really understood this classist bollocks...
Yeah. Look at Gram Parsons. He was rich.
This "Horror-phobia" is wonderfully inane.
I am right, you are incorrect
its not classist bollocks.
They are playing at being rock stars, they are playing at being scruffy oiks.
They can piss off...even more so now I've heard their 'music' There are thousands of bands all round the world making wilfully retro music, and covering garage/freakbeat classics. Normally they do a few gigs a year at sixties revival get togethers, supporting reformed sixties great, like The Action, The Creation etc.
The only difference between those revival acts, and The Horrors, is that the Horrors are public school boys, and they are on the cover of NME...and for that I spit on them, and their mediocrity. New Sound? NO (emphatically) Parents will hate them? Well, only if they actually bought Crawdaddy Simone back in '65, and are disgusted at how the Horrors are murdering it (playing it badly, wrong, etc)
what's wrong
with public school boys being in bands?
two words
kula. shaker.
I'll bet the majority of those parents won't like it.
Noisy music is hated by 90%* of parents of any age.
*Made up figure.
the horrors make me gothiLOL
and how did they get my email address?
Novelty
band. Here today, forgotton tomora. Bunch of King's Cross rentboys.
well done
you're now a member of Kasabian. Feel free to 'ave it large any time you want from now on!
How so very cutting
Would actually play with them but not keen on the new track. Besides, I'm playing with half the Verve so I'm spoken for.
the half
that were completely shite or the half that were utterly shite?
Their singer got beaten up and its front page news on NME.com
He's angry.
walking down whitechapel road at 3am
which is really a silly thing to do anyway..
Didn't he get beaten up for not being able to answer a simple question?
-
from wikipedia:
"They look awful and sound terrible — but so did the Sex Pistols," enthused Conor McNicholas, the Editor of NME. "Why wait to put them on the front cover?"
good one, craig.
NME is exactly the same as smash hits
if you can't see that then you take live far to seriously.
i KNOW FOR A FACT that no money changed hands. i know that PR companies rule the NME. all the major bands have pr companies that won't let them go on the cover unless this other smaller band gets a good single review, a live review and probably a radar. i know how the nme works. and in this case they are just in love with the horrors. Conor is liturally pissing himself over them.
also the loog connection is relevant, but i don't think its nepotism, just that loog sign bands they know the NME will like because the know exactly what that is and has the contacts to get them in.
so with all the politiking aside
their music is great. death in the chapel is excellent, in spite of its bullshit dvd format. & a lack of a b-side is bullshit as well.
so to conclude everything that has been said: yes, the music industry is one giant piece of shit THAT WE ALL FUND. now all the indie kiddies will get pissy, but i'm stating we're responsible for the mess the industry's in. i'm just saying that the responsibilty lies on the consumder, not the industry. as long as people pay ridiculour prices for a cd that sucks donkey balls, then they'll continue to crank out the lifeless, soulless music that makes so much money.
Hahahaha
Literally pissing himself... imagine Conor McNicholas just spontaneously pissing every time the Horrors got put on in the office. Or actually, don't.
i think
that an alternate good one craig should be good one, conor.
grandparent music
made this point further up in reply, but I'm gonna say it again
The Only reason parents might hate this music, would be if they didn't like their own parents music. Ie- The Horrors are doing fairly straight covers of music from the early-mid sixties Jack The Ripper- done by Screaming Lord Sutch in '63, and Crawdaddy Simone, done by The Syndicats in '65...not like The Horrors have brought anything new...aside from being freakishly ugly, of course
...
are shit
I
don't understand why their video got banned. It's just strobe lighting and some intestines?
the dis sheep
have spoken baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
They're on Loog records, right?
I heard the guy who used to be the editor of NME owns loog.
so that's that.
i like em
as do i
.
This Was The Death Of
The NME
and the start of quartely DIS Magazine....