Anyone else here think the Strokes are totally overrated?

[Michael Daniels]

I bought the album a few months after it came out strictly based on reviews. I had some hesitation after initially checking out some tracks at a preview station in a record store but thought it could be one of those sleeper albums that reveals its genius upon more concentrated listening.

A number of listens going into the double digits later and I still don't see what the big deal is?

I'm I missing something that others hear or it is a bunch of overhype that took off big time?

[RandomKoolzip]

1. Yes, I agree.

Jeez, why do they use that effect on Mr. Casablanca'a voice throughout the entire album? It's awful.

If the Strokes were over thirty and looked like normal people, nobody would care. It's all about looks. No one can write a melody worth a damn in that group.

If you're looking for young hip rock bands, there are dozens of others to get into, like Karate, the Wrens,The MArs Volta....Just because they (The Strokes) get on the cover of every magazine doesn't mean you have to care.

Plus, flame me all you like, I always thought that the Velvet Underground were overrated. And anyband that reminds me too much of the velvets, i.e. the Strokes, Yo La Tengo, etc. I just can't get into. It seems as though critics will lionize ANYTHING that sounds like the velvets. Maybe this is why I don't work as a rock critic anymore.

[phillybri]

2. Any new band with "The" in their name....

The Strokes
The White Stripes
The Hives
The Vines
The Ataris

Look at the facts. These bands all suck!!!

[RandomKoolzip]

4. Well, I kinda like the White Stripes.

I mean, they're not what Spin Magazine thinks they are, but they have some songs I like a lot and I think Meg White is a great drummer (Obviously she's not Billy Cobham, but she has her own sound, and you wouldn't be able to mistake her style for someone else's). Again, too much hype is turning people off to these groups....I pine for a day when a band can appear on a major label, playing guitars, bass, and drums, and not be labelled "The Future of Rock!!!" or some such nonsense. It just creates unrealistic expectations. THere will never be another Beatles.

[Cush]

8. agree

and why the hell would someone cover "The Boys Of Summer"?

[vi5]

3. I think it's the same thing as happened with Nirvana.......

....Only with much less success.

The fact is that Nirvana's music was really no great shakes, especially when you consider all the stuff that had existed for years in the underground/indie/punk/alternative scene. But when you put one of Nirvana's songs on the radio up against all the ridiculous hair metal and such that permeated the airwaves, it sounded positively revolutionary (which it most definitely was not).

Same thing with the Strokes. Unto themselves and compared to about 8 million bands that came before they aren't doing anything of note. But put their songs up against all the rap metal crap and angst rock that dominated the past couple of years and it sounds much better than it actually is.

In both instances the boldest thing about either bands sucess is more that some record exec pulled his head out of his keister long enough to sign a band that was not playing your typical mainstream style of popular music.

[Loonman]

5. Derivative crap

Says I.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. I Agree, But. . .

. . .the very nature of the "garage" sound is supposed to be derivative.

Doesn't make me want to buy it or anything, but i can't knock it for being derivative, when that's the plan.
The Professor

[Loonman]

9. I suppose

But I only really notice stuff if it is exciting and stands alone. The Strokes aren't doing anything we all haven't heard before.

[northernsoul]

7. try The Libertines instead

I think they're much more the genuine deal of what all the hypsters said the Strokes were supposed to be