Drowned in Sound

Search



the strokes 12:51
no votes
?
by Gareth Dobson
  • Type: Single
  • Release date: 06/10/2003
  • Label: Rough Trade
Paul: Kinda crept up on you, didn’t it?
Martin: No, you drove us here.*

And so, appears the first new work from The Strokes in almost a year, but frankly, it seems like forever.

Back with something between a bang and a cheery wave, ’12:51’ is a smart piece of brevity that goes someway to microcosmically indicating the forthcoming ‘Room On Fire’; similar, whilst at the same time commendably evolved. All the familiar hallmarks are there, from the angular new-wave cool to Julian Casablanca’s down-the-telephone vocals. What it does offer however, is the assurance that despite working in a fairly confined area of music, The Strokes are clever enough to push it to its limits and find constantly new, contorted ways of re-inventing the same wheel. Smart.

* The opening quote comes from, of course, the quintessentially cool film Grosse Point Blank. If it doesn’t quite work as intro to a Strokes review, well, that doesn’t matter. It’s Grosse Point Blank, and it’s probably their favourite film.

  • The Strokes 8 / 10
Words: Gareth Dobson

the album

You won't be disappointed with the album....if anything, 12.51 is pretty weak compared to most of the tracks. The most striking thing seems to be the evolution of Julian's vocals...he seems to have transcended the whole "bored but cool" thing and become a real sooooul singer. (particularly on 'under control', one of the most gorgeous things ever.) Strange, I didn't think I'd be that impressed by the new album either.

Re: the album

indeed, Under Control is amazing. the best of a spunky lot. kinda like a stones-y ballad...

Re: the album

so many wines 2 try and so few dollars.should i buy the strokes?

strokes are new conspiracy

Bah! It sounds exactly like everything else they've done and so is completely stale. Same dispassionate vocals, same minimal riff, most of all, same fucking chugging rhythm. Sure it worked two years ago...

You don't even say *why* it sounds different, do you? The sentance which starts "What it does offer however..." is completely circular - it just says it sounds new because it sounds new. You can't justify a statement by just restating it! Unless you have a really cool voice - but even this ploy doesn't work through the media of written text, obviously.

Re: strokes are new conspiracy

my favourite thing about them used to be the inventiveness and fullness of the guitar arrangements. whilst this tune is nice, the guitar-playing-the vocal line thing is damn disappointing. ii like the kinda-squiggly guitar breaks that pop up once or twice tho

Re: strokes are new conspiracy

Some good points, sure, but inarticulacy reaches new heights...!!

Re: strokes are new conspiracy

Good god. it's a single review. I thought the phrase 'similar whilst at the same time commendably evolved'. would be a decent guide.

It'e the strokes but a little bit different.

It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song It's a Strokes song

How hard is that to grasp?

jaunty. casio. new wave. strokes. mid tempo. grower.
assymetrical.

alright?

sheesh. And are you telling me that there's someone who cares about the strokes who hasn't actually heard the thing yet?

Retro futurism?

The Strokes are aping the Ramones and just adding superficial widdy-bits, sure they're OK but they're not revolutionising rock just remining us what made it so great in the first place.

Seriously...

You've either not heard the strokes or the ramones (or neither...hmmm)
This song just sounds like The Cars, but that's never a bad thing. There are REM-y bits on the new album too, which is a bit weird.

Strokes: sound like Buzzcocks?

Ok, Mr Dom has said The Strokes do not reference The Buzzcocks. Which is bollocks.

Surely some other of the five people that will read this mus recognise this glaringly obvious fact?

Re: Strokes: sound like Buzzcocks?

Not really.
You can see that they may have been infulenced by The Buzzcocks at some point or other.
But it's not the most obvious of influences.
At least, that's what I think.

Re: Strokes: sound like Buzzcocks?

The only bollocks are those sat betwixt the ears of a man who believes the Strokes anything like the Buzzcocks.


Re: Strokes: sound like Buzzcocks?

Andy

As I've already said, each to their own, but....

If The Strokes sound like The Buzzcocks then TATU are the new Megadeth, Westlife are My Bloody Valentine's successful pseudonym and Britney Spears is actually Shirley Manson with blonde highlights.

Both bands may have originally been influenced by the same scene (New York circa 1976) but whereas one took those ideas away and created their own identity, the others are merely a better looking New York Dolls tribute act with rich mummies and daddies.

Dom G.

Re: Strokes: sound like Buzzcocks?

Oh dear.
New York Dolls?

12:51 in Electro already..?

newyork electroclash style cover of the Strokes?

absurd...
by Dj Dsico or someone?
http://4trak.net/dsico/archives/000304.html

Re: 12:51 in Electro already..?

another one??

Re: 12:51 in Electro already..?

There's another cover of 12:51, by a bunch of cows:
http://www.gelbartmusic.com/lonesomes/
(in the audio page)

Strokes = Pugwall

12:51 sounds like the intro music to Pugwall's Summer.
I only just noticed this morning.
Wierd...
Orange Organics were kick ass.