Backstreet Boys: Never Gone

Maura McAndrew

Backstreet's back, with sleeker suits and more ridiculous hats.

Backstreet Boys

Never Gone

Label: Jive
US Release Date: 2005-06-14
UK Release Date: 2005-06-13
Amazon affiliate

Backstreet Boys. These are words that inspire hate, that cause self-aware 15-year-olds to spit venom and curse their car radios. But why? The Backstreet Boys have stood, for almost 10 years now, at the helm of the 1990s boy band explosion, a movement that, with the rise and demise of colleagues 'N Sync and imitators like 98 Degrees, seems to have ended. But after a long hiatus, Backstreet's back, and they're not going to let go of the dream.

Trying to listen to Never Gone was difficult, because to me listening to a boy band is like trying read a text book: I just can't focus on it. Hearing "Incomplete", the first single, pumping through my speakers at top volume was like an out-of-body experience. Never have I played Backstreet Boys in my room, and the old concern came to mind: What if someone I know hears? The most disappointing thing about Never Gone, however, is that it's not a guilty pleasure. After one listen it's apparent there's no pleasure involved in this album, neither in process or product. It's the same old thing, as are the liner notes with the Boys in suits and contrived poses, heads cocked just so, fedoras askew, facial hair stenciled like fishing line.

While the music on Never Gone is an attempt (by the many, many pop maestros credited in the liner notes) at variety, the lyrics were probably written by someone in their sleep (or a machine). Songs like "Just Want You To Know" and "Crawling Back to You" test the limits of every cliché in the history of pop music. Just as you become thankful that a song will be shallow, fun, and sans strings, you're eventually disappointed. "Weird World" is the closest the Boys get to good old-fashioned fun (à la "I Want It That Way"), bringing a splash of Jamiraquai and actual enthusiasm to the album. What this does, however, is only emphasize the lack of enjoyment throughout the other songs. Most of the time the Backstreet Boys have no idea what they're singing, and why should they? The words they're singing mean nothing, as do the voices they use. It's pretty difficult to distinguish between any of the Boys, and not worth the effort. It's the Britney Spears, nasal, gulping style of singing used by this and other boy bands that makes the songs so completely dull. They're singing how they've been told to sing by people with no vocal talent themselves.

What stops the Backstreet Boys from being any fun is, I think, their inability/refusal to wink at their audience. Everything is dead serious, from the earnest quotations of Bible verses in the liner notes, to the photos of the Boys playing a good ol' game of cards, in white suits, in the middle of a field. To acknowledge the ridiculousness of this performance would not be to lose their fans, but it would perhaps bolster their music with a sort of ironic value. Even 'N Sync knew enough to do this, dancing as marionettes in the "Bye Bye Bye" video, and even calling their album No Strings Attached. But the Backstreet Boys keep striking in the same spot, and the iron has long since cooled. They're older and unenthusiastic and they'll do what they can to keep riding the wave, but that's it. That smooth, prepubescent tone still stings in their voices; tunes about losing love and beating down some poor woman's door still glide by on a wave of Diane Warren-inspired stings. Never Gone has not offered anyone a reason to like boy bands, and the Backstreet Boys seem content to fade into top forty hell with so many others. But they could at least have the decency to show us their strings.


So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.