The Singles Jukebox

OK. OK? OK…

[Video][Website]
[6.75]

Michaelangelo Matos: At first they seemed unnecessary. Then they seemed OK. Soon they seemed kind of good. Maybe even just good. Hell, maybe really good. No: actually, OK, Lust Lust Lust, that one was really good, no hedging necessary. Now they’re OK again. And we know where that leads.
[6]

Anthony Easton: Beautiful vocals, and an almost purity of the delivery reminds me of a slightly roughed up, hardened aging Shangri La’s. The whole album updates and makes explicit what was previously coded in female oriented garage rock. I love this.
[9]

Pete Baran: If they do suddenly make it big, they will do it with a song which will not be all that different to any of their other tracks. They won’t change, the world might. So “Bang” has as good a chance as any to do it, and as I belong in the “will buy their stuff anyway” camp, it gets a steady mark from me.
[7]

Doug Robertson: To a certain extent The Raveonettes aren’t so much a band as a refining process, releasing the same song over and over again but each time smoothing the edges, buffing the surfaces and generally doing their best to achieve perfection in their chosen genre, and so it follows that there’s nothing unexpected here; if you’ve heard any other Raveonettes track then you’ll have a rough idea what this sounds like, but the pleasure comes when that roughness is removed and the sheer love they have shines through. This isn’t essential by any stretch of the imagination, but neither are pickled onions, and we all know how much pleasure they bring, even if they’re not to everyone’s taste.
[7]

Ian Mathers: Remember when these guys and the Kills were grouped together? Yeah, that makes about as much sense as those reviews that compared the first Fiery Furnaces album to the White Stripes. But while the Kills have gone from strength to strength, somehow becoming more stylized and more heartfelt at the same time, these guys are good for a few decent singles per record but that’s about all. “Bang!” is no “The Beat Dies” — hell, it’s no “Last Dance” from this record either. It’s not a bad little song, but in a world where the Raveonettes’ influences are still around, there’s not much point in paying much attention to it either. They should have been braver and released “Boys Who Rape (Should All Be Destroyed)” instead.
[6]

Martin Skidmore: This does sound very like the Jesus and Mary Chain on one of their gentler numbers if they had a female singer and were doing a Beach Boys homage. This, of course, is a good thing.
[7]

Alfred Soto: If I were one of the Reid brothers, I’d inspect my archives to make sure these Danish wünderkinds didn’t steal this Darklands outtake. Then they should tell Pains of Being Pure at Heart’s lawyers that they’ve dropped the plagiarism lawsuit.
[5]

Alex Ostroff: Besides Brian Wilson, there’s no one indie pop loves emulating more than Phil Spector. The Raveonettes don’t do anything new with the formula, but are competently catchy. If only the chorus were actually a Stones-referencing “kids wanna fight out in the street,” (rather than “bop”). The added edge would bump this up to an [8]. Sadly, the song is never as vicious as it claims, and Goldfrapp’s “Rocket” gives more Bang! for the buck.
[7]