fun.: Some Nights

In a bizarre, inverted way, Some Nights is Nate Ruess coming into his own as a singer and songwriter.


Some Nights

Label: Fueled By Ramen
US Release Date: 2012-02-21
UK Release Date: 2012-02-21

To my frustration, I became aware of the Format (Nate Ruess' band prior to fun.) immediately after they announced their hiatus. And it's a real shame, because 2006's Dog Problems, while seldom matching the artistry of its exemplars (Harry Nilsson, Jellyfish), was, at the time of its release, a singular and rather alien pop gem that supposedly transferred to a live setting wonderfully. In hindsight, it's clear that a lot of the Format's more tasteful leanings, not to mention the teensy bit of rock and roll spirit they did have, can be wholly attributed to the Format's co-leader, Sam Means, who seems to have unjustly faded into invisibility since then.

Fun.'s latest record, Some Nights, like Aim and Ignite before it, is not really a rock record, or even a pop/rock or powerpop record -- there is not a single glint of rebellious, refractory energy on this record that could be considered "rock" (unless you're counting the appropriated Queen harmonies, which weren't "rock" then and certainly aren't "rock" now). The '70s AM pop predilection, that was clearly a particularity of Aim and Ignite producer Steve McDonald's (of bubblepunk wunderkinds Redd Kross) rather than the band's, isn't there anymore to coarsen the drippy compositions (if you can even believe they would in the first place).

Here, for instance, virtually everything about the "Some Nights Intro" screams "edgy radio Disney", and in fact, if you look at Some Nights from that perspective - as idiosyncratic top 40 pop - it's a success (although there are still artists such as They Might Be Giants and Ariel Pink, who have made more successful and far less arrogant and impassive attempts at the same sort of thing). But concentrating on it can be a huge burden on the ears. Nate Ruess' lyrics are, when they're feeling merciful, unremarkable, and at their very worst, seriously horrible (in the first song alone he strains to rhyme "Twitter" with "bitter", a maneuver which suggests serious lyrical desperation), and are sung with such straight-faced Zach Efron effrontery you feel a little embarrassed for the singer.

Breakout hit "We Are Young" is no goof in the hooks department, but its alignment with other pop radio hits and the fact that it was covered on Glee are a testament to the mainstream pop comparison; it sounds stale and sterile after a single listen. "Carry On" is a ballad so ultra-cornball, it could substitute for "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" if the Lion King had been made today. "Why Am I The One" begins promisingly, with a straightforward pop-punk-tinged riff, but is far from the most straightforward song on the album, and blossoms (or regresses) into a pretentious and slapdash "mini-symphony" with little coherent structure or hooks to speak of.

"All Alone" is without a doubt the best song the album has to offer and is nearly free of blemishes. It kicks off with a baroque keyboard line, and the vocal melody and blown-out drums are instantly infectious and overcoming. Sure, Reuss' voice is going to sound so damn good whether he's singing nursery rhymes, "Whole Lotta Love" or anything in between, but it's going to sound best in this climate. A simplistic melody accommodates his vocals best. The first four measures of piano in "All Alright" are identical to "Home Sweet Home" by Motley Crue -- an unsettling fake-out -- although the real thing isn't much better. And then here we are again, back in the nondescript pop vacuum for the remaining four tracks.

In spite of its significant mainstream, middle school-girl appeal, it's doubtful that Nate Ruess made any artistic compromises during the recording of Some Nights. The conventional pop parasite has been inside of him all this time, and there are even moments in Dog Problems where his voice sounds too accessible to be at the front of a powerpop band. In a bizarre, inverted way, Some Nights is Nate Ruess coming into his own as a singer and songwriter. But for those of us who don't enjoy mainstream pop, the songs were sharper when those sensibilities weren't being facilitated.


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.