I really dig the Futureheads' cover of Kate Bush's "Hounds of Love", and I finally got 'round to getting their album off of iTunes a couple days ago, because Glorious Noise told me to. (Why is the album listed in iTunes twice, in both the Rock and Pop genres, at $9.99 and $14.85, respectively? Both feature the same number and duration of songs, but one has a later release date.)
They have a sound that I'd describe as nostalgic. Interpol got compared to Joy Division so endlessly that it became de rigeur, but why aren't people going nuts over the Futureheads' future version of the Jam? Are the Jam so off the radar now? On first listen the album is enjoyable, if a little samey, especially tempo-wise. Think the Jam with multiple Paul Wellers and serious vocal chops, with more skitter and jump and thicker accents--"lucky" becomes "looky", rather amusingly. I made breakfast while listening to this record this morning (pancakes from scratch and veggie sausages). So far the songs I already knew, "Hounds of Love" and "Carnival Kids" seem the best, but I could get into it, if after repeated listenings the lyrics to their originals prove interesting enough.
i really like the futureheads, and it's their use of multipart harmonies that is very distinctive. however, they are much like the thermals in that it's hard to distinguish many of the songs from one another. i mean, i love the thermals, but after a while you wish they would change things up a bit. after repeated listens to the futureheads album, i still think that "hounds of love" is the best song of theirs. the futureheads are a good time, but i definitely think "the jam! the jam!" whenever i listen to their stuff.
January 15, 2005 04:46 PM