CD Review: fun., “Some Nights”

Allen Lulu February 24, 2012 8
fun., "Some Nights"

Fueled by Ramen

If you name your band fun., your albums better damned well be.

A couple years back a record made its way to me through the folks at Popdose. It was a brilliant piece of pop confection called Aim & Ignite by an indie “supergroup” of sorts. Led by the Format’s Nate Reuss with keyboardist Andrew Dost and Jack Antonoff, the guitarist and frontman for the exceptional New Jersey pop rock band Steel Train, that album was fraught with rock tropes done right. It was upbeat, catchy and at times — like during “The Gambler” — it could downright make you cry.

After releasing Aim & Ignite, fun. signed with a new label, Fueled by Ramen, went on the road and, sadly, doubled down on all the wrong things.

Their new album Some Nights just came out this week, and it’s everything it’s not supposed to be while being everything the band wanted it to be.

Some Nights starts off promisingly enough. The familiar themes abound. The Queen influences, the multiple time signatures, the hooks, the ear candy of Reuss’s vocals. Trouble is, while Reuss wears his influences (Queen, hip-hop, ’60s pop, Elton John) and his heart on his sleeve, more often than not these two things work against each other.

It’s one thing to sing about life as a musician on a song like “Stars” — it’s actually sweet and melodic, and then it takes a horrible turn into Auto Tune, which made me wish I had gotten the album on vinyl so I could rip it off the turntable and toss it across the room.

See, when Nate led the Format, they put out a pair of fantastic power pop records — the best of which, Dog Problems, was one of the best of its kind of the last decade, easily outdoing Jimmy Eat World in songwriting, catchiness and musicianship. When he launched fun. it was obvious he and the band were going to push the boundaries of what a three-piece made up of a lead singer, guitar and piano could do. They brought in a ton of session players and crafted an album that owed as much to George Martin as it did to Queen and indie rock.

And then they doubled down.

It doesn’t happen right away. The title track is hooky, by gum, and it calls to mind Paul Simon’s Graceland in every good way that Vampire Weekend does not. And, like a good piece of pop, you can follow along before the song is over. That’s what good pop songs are supposed to do.

But the band betrays their true intentions on the next song, the hit single “We Are Young.” Effectively two catchy but incomplete songs mashed together, the song has a monster chorus that won’t leave you for hours or days after you hear it. Normally that would be a good thing, but, for me, upon closer examination, I started to wonder: First off, the song showed up months ago on Glee. As an episode closer it was odd and also exhilarating for a song by a band I had been following to get out there and hoping would find a larger audience, and Glee certainly propelled the track to “hit single” status. And when I heard it, I mean, really heard it, the song became a mainstay in our house. But it never escaped me that, while it was titled “We Are Young featuring Janelle Monae,” Janelle Monae sings four words, four times. And that’s it. She’s there to help them sell units.

Fine. I’m not from the old school where you’re supposed to hate bands for “selling out.” I don’t cotton to that. I want my favorite band to jump into the stratosphere and sell millions of unit. I’m not possessive. I’m happy to say, “I knew them when.” But, when the earworm has finished winding its way through the brain, you’re left with just an empty carcass of an anthem designed specifically to sell a lot of units so they can play bigger venues and get everyone to raise their hands and “Radio Ga Ga” themselves into bliss.

Nate and the boys aren’t the indie U2, despite how much they seem to want to be taking that mantle — and if a song is just there to be an anthem, a la “We Are the Champions,” it better be as rallying as Foxy Shazam’s “Unstoppable” or it’s not worth your money.

This track, arguably one of the three best on the record (the others being the Timbaland influenced “One Foot” and the title track) should have been true to its Phil Spector roots, but instead it’s the sine wave of pop songs: You hate it and then realize that the reason you hate it is because it’s ear candy and so good at being it that you love it and then you hate it for making you love it and then you give in to the love and then after a moment you come to your senses, hate it again and then you’re so exhausted you can’t remember if you like it or not, but it doesn’t matter because it’s stuck in your brain.

For me, the saddest part of the Some Nights experience is that you can tell that these guys know their way around a song. They know how to bring the joy, because they’ve proven that in the past. But, when their obsession with experimentation gets in the way of delivering on their promise, it’s an exercise in masturbation and excess and the result is the track “It Gets Better,” which might actually be a good song if it didn’t end up sounding like Death Cab for Cutie being raped by Kanye West. Why the Auto-Tune, boys? Oh, because every indie band eventually gets bored and falls in love with hip-hop. It’s the Rivers Cuomo disease.

It doesn’t work here.

Some Nights is not a great record. If you hear it, most of it will sound like it’s a good record. But it’s joyless and soulless. It’s weak because it panders to its audience. It’s sad because it wants so badly to be “important” and a rallying cry.

For someone who loved the Format and Steel Train and fun.’s first album as much as I did, Some Nights is a crushing disappointment.

  • Anne Haines

    “You hate it and then realize that the reason you hate it is because it’s ear candy and so good at being it that you love it and then you hate it for making you love it and then you give in to the love and then after a moment you come to your senses, hate it again and then you’re so exhausted you can’t remember if you like it or not, but it doesn’t matter because it’s stuck in your brain.” I want this on a t-shirt dammit.

  • David_E

    “You hate it and then realize that the reason you hate it is because it’s ear candy and so good at being it that you love it and then you hate it for making you love it and then you give in to the love and then after a moment you come to your senses, hate it again and then you’re so exhausted you can’t remember if you like it or not, but it doesn’t matter because it’s stuck in your brain.”
    Me, I just want this explained. So your problem is … you have no problem, but you want so bad to have a problem, that you go looking for problems?

  • http://www.popdose.com DwDunphy

    It did bother me initially, and the auto tune still does, but there are some bright spots. The one-two of “Why Am I The One” and “All Alone” really works for me. The title track, while nearly a mash-up of S&G’s “Cecelia” and Kanye’s “Love Lockdown,” is one I grew to love more than loving on the fly. “One Foot” is a club banger. Other songs on the disc are harder to defend, but there is good stuff to be had.

    The overriding question is how much of a band is this actually? I’m a fan of producer Steven McDonald (who did Dog Problems, Aim & Ignite and Steel Train’s most recent). He is a throwback to ’70s rock – part Keith Olsen and part Roy Thomas Baker, and thus Ruess’ efforts with him reflect that. Jeff Bhasker is strictly a hip-hop/rap producer (and co-produced both Kanye’s 808s & Heartbreak and Dark Twisted Fantasy) and his influence is overwhelming. Did the band do anything at all on “One Foot” or did Bhasker make a beat and Ruess added vocals? Who’s to say, other than it sounds that way.

    I think my big turnaround on the record is that there is enough of that power-pop DNA in there that I’m rooting for it to be a gateway influence for a new audience. Not that I’m expecting this to become some new revivalist trend, but if Fun can show the struggling indie poppers out there that a little success is possible, maybe they won’t hang it up en mass for jobs at the grocery store.

  • Allen Lulu

    Points taken, DW. For a fan of the band such as I, the disappointment was staggering. 
    I found, on the fourth listen, that while I tapped my foot and good hum along, I felt empty and…well, you read the review.
    This is an odd duck of a “group” since they are two musicians and Reuss and, while I know Antonoff plays the drums, I’m not sure why they felt the need to program so much. I have heard some interviews and that may have been what sent me over the edge. Toward the end of my fourth go round I heard the interview where they talked about the Kanye influence and, to be honest, after Lullabies, Dog Problems and then Aim & Ignite, that was the LAST thing I wanted from this group. 
    Especially since Steel Train’s album was so great, I can not understand why Jack and Andrew are not elevated. It’s the Nate Reuss show, certainly in concert it is that, I think they could have done a LOT better. 
    This could have been a stratospheric record. Who knows? Maybe the pandering will pay off. 

  • Patrick K.

    “Their new album Some Nights just came out this week, and it’s everything it’s not supposed to be while being everything the band wanted it to be.”

    This has thus far been my main gripe with the album as well. You can’t argue with the production and the songwriting itself, and I don’t, but there’s a life and a spark missing that no prior work by any of the primaries (either as fun. or other rock lives) has ever had a problem with. As a product, as art, it sounds good…but it doesn’t FEEL good. There’s a hollowness there and I think it’s an artifact of the…call it desperation…to be successful and famous. I don’t begrudge them that (as a fan of power pop and melodic rock in general I wish more people would appreciate it), but it’s tough to balance the art and the finance

  • Patrick K.

    “Their new album Some Nights just came out this week, and it’s everything it’s not supposed to be while being everything the band wanted it to be.”

    This has thus far been my main gripe with the album as well. You can’t argue with the production and the songwriting itself, and I don’t, but there’s a life and a spark missing that no prior work by any of the primaries (either as fun. or other rock lives) has ever had a problem with. As a product, as art, it sounds good…but it doesn’t FEEL good. There’s a hollowness there and I think it’s an artifact of the…call it desperation…to be successful and famous. I don’t begrudge them that (as a fan of power pop and melodic rock in general I wish more people would appreciate it), but it’s tough to balance the art and the finance

  • Tessch14

    You Summed up ALL my thoughts and feelings here. To the point. I completely agree 100% with everything here. Their new album was very disappointing. Why Auto tune something that’s already perfect? Ruins Nate Ruess. 

  • Steve

    I agree and I was a huge fan of Aim and Ignite but there is something that you didn’t mention that really bothered me. :/
    They took out all those mad layers of instrumentation. Some Nights doesn’t have a fraction of the instruments used on Aim and Ignite and in return, there are these sickish processed drum beats and electronic drones. I don’t hate electronic influences but when they are used to bluntly without the finesse of making them sound ethereal.

    And the vocal effects, that’s another story. I don’t dislike vocal effects. When they are done right (Bon Iver’s Hinnom, Tx or Woods for instance) they sound beautiful but they must have applied an effect called ‘snot-filled nostrils’ on the vocals in It Gets Better because christ, it sounds like Nate is dying of a cold.

    I think the band need to seriously revise what made Aim and Ignite such a great album because in my opinion, a lot of what made A&I so good was abandoned on Some Nights and exchanged for elementary hip-hop influences that sure, might have worked with more time and care.

    I can only imagine the Some Nights batch of songs sound like gold live though.