Does It Offend You, Yeah?: You Have No Idea What You're Getting Yourself Into

For all their ostensible bravado and faux-obnoxiousness, Does It Offend You, Yeah? could do with being a little less inoffensive.


You Have No Idea What You're Getting Yourself Into

Display Artist: Does It Offend You, Yeah?
Label: EMI
US Release Date: 2008-04-15
UK Release Date: 2008-03-28

Chances are, if you've read anything at all about Does It Offend You, Yeah?, you'll have read some sort of qualitative assessment of that name. And I'm sorry, I'm not going to buck the trend. But it's with good reason, because it's likely that without such an exceptionally obnoxious -- not to mention crap -- moniker and the hot air it's generated, I likely wouldn't have heard their debut album and wouldn't be writing this review, which you wouldn't be reading. And by that reasoning, it's not so bad after all; the name has done its job, it's got them noticed. And that may have been crucial, because the name is probably the most idiosyncratic thing about Does It Offend You, Yeah?, who otherwise merge together two disengaged factions of their record collections to create a something that sounds like, erm…the merging together of two disengaged factions of their record collections, actually.

Well, it's less merging together, really, than a simple placing side-by-side. Because unlike Klaxons' Myths for the Near Future, Does It Offend You's debut isn't all that successful -- in fact, might not even try, for all it sounds -- at creating a coherent blend a dance and indie, and consequently You Have No Idea What You're Getting Yourself Into is pretty much a 50/50 split of electronic dance numbers and new-ravish indie. "Doomed Now" showcases perhaps the only real attempt to combine the two, but amounts to little more than straightforward indie warped a little by a vocoder.

Not that they're particularly bad in either field, mind. First single "We Are Rockstars" was an obvious choice, its blatant Daft Punkisms lugged around by a memorable bass-heavy synth line custom-built for dancefloors, where the driving, pummelling rhythm section and fraught vocals of "With a Heavy Heart (I Regret to Inform You)" will most likely follow. "Let's Make Out", meanwhile, is perfectly competent bratty dance-rock, though its titular suggestion, repeated ad infinitum for the song's chorus, carries all the charm of a sex pest and is roughly as irritating.

You Have No Idea fares less well in its 'indie half'. Not because the songs are worse; "Dawn of the Dead" is pretty decent, while "Epic Last Song", though hardly what it claims, is a sensible choice for closer given that it boasts probably the album's most memorable chorus. Instead, the problem is that, here, Does It Offend You are even less distinctive than before: "Being Bad Feels Pretty Good" is a Joy Division cover band (say, Editors) fronted by Robert E. Smith (though kitted out with funk bassist), "Dawn of the Dead"'s steel drums can't disguise that fact that it's Klaxons in lethargy, while "Epic Last Song" is a flagrant Bloc Party rip-off. Even the vocal of "With a Heavy Heart", an album high-point, reminds of Foals' Yannis Philippakis and thus highlights the absence of the latter outfit's clinical instrumental flair in Does It Offend You's arsenal.

And it's this that makes You Have No Idea nothing like the album Does It Offend You, Yeah? are probably capable of; which makes it a mildly diverting listen when it could have been a pretty damn good album if its creators had injected wholesale the verve it occasionally displays. It's fair to say that every song on You Have No Idea sounds different, but every one sounds like someone else, too. When everything is added up, it all falls a little short in every department. You Have No Idea isn't an album of emotion, but it isn't the album of attitude its title implies, either. Neither, crucially, does it sound like Does It Offend You, Yeah? are particularly having fun, surely a pre-requisite for dance-rock set of this ilk. Add this to the fact that the album's better moments ("We Are Rockstars", "With a Heavy Heart") are all grounded in impact -- a virtue that fades from first exposure -- and it's hard not to view this as a disappointment. Ultimately, for all their ostensible bravado and faux-obnoxiousness, Does It Offend You, Yeah? could do with being a little less inoffensive.


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.