So Smash Hits is no more. What a shame. Where will be without Smash Hits editorial alumni like Neil Tennant, Mark Frith and, er, Kate Thornton. Ah, those happy days I spent memorising the lyrics to Baggy Trousers and Shuddupa Your Face from its hallowed pages. The free badges on the cover.
But it does make me wonder what kids who are into pop music are reading now. Is it really all online? Or is it different kinds of magazines?
I was in a local grocery store the other day and the middle aged woman in front of me was buying some food with her son, who was, I’d guess, around ten. Then he went over and picked up a copy of Nuts which she duly bought. This particular issue featured a topless photo of ‘Chantelle’ on the cover with a tiny text-box covering her nipples. Now call me an old prude if you like, but is this what kids are encouraged to read by their parents? At the very least, they ought to be sneaking out and buying this stuff without their mum seeing they’ve got it. Perhaps I should be pleased that the child’s obviously reading something. I’m scared to think that his family spend their evenings sat around the telly watching the latest free striptease DVD covermounted on Loaded or Maxim too.
Smash Hits Is Dead
Tags:
Comments
2 responses to “Smash Hits Is Dead”
I’m a recent convert to your site. A friend of mine recommended it and from everything i’ve read so far it wouldn’t surprsie me if i paid a visit at least once everyday from now on – well monday to friday that is. Though one thing does worry me. I scanned through your movie reviews – some i agreed with (Brokeback) and some that made me question your sanity (King Kong)- and i noticed that your review of Munich is poor, i mean really poor. Almost like you couldn’t really be bothered to write it. Two thirds of it is descriptive and the other third consists of repitition and weak praise, e.g. “…we never quite know what’s going to happen… You simply don’t know what’s going to happen” and “A little long, but very worthwhile”. I just think that if you’re going to publish a review on your site that you expect other people to spend their time reading, then at least write a good one and be honest. Just from the way the review is written and not what is written, i would say that Munich porobaly wasn’t as good as you’d hoped was it, was it? Because if you had really liked it, i bet you’d have written at least half as much as you did for Kong. All i’m saying is, if people are good enough to bother to read your reviews then please be honest and don’t waste our time.
Interesting comments.
Yes the Munich review’s not going to get me Peter Bradshaw’s job in The Guardian, but then I don’t make any pretence that this site is anything but a hobby and something for me to look back at for my thoughts on films.
I probably should write a couple of thousand words on any film that deserves it, but I don’t. In this case I wrote around 200 words and it probably takes, what, 20 seconds to read the whole thing. (As I alluded to in the review, this was the second time I wrote the review). It’s a fine line when writing about a film how much of the plot needs to be explained and how much you concentrate on its attributes instead.
I wrote at length about King Kong because I’d been looking forward enormously to seeing the film. I’d watched the video diaries for a well over a year leading up to it, and I’d loved the original. I’m not objective. I don’t pretend otherwise.
Munich is an exceptionally good film. It’s not Spielberg’s best, but it’s a lot better than most of the dross out there. The set pieces are exceptionally well handled, and the performances strong. The subject matter’s not easily accessible, and it won’t be a box-office smash, but as long as Spielberg alternates this kind of fare with War of the Worlds, his backers won’t mind.
All said and done, I charge no money, and make no promises about anything here – this site can be a stream of consciousness sort of thing. And if what I write, in your view, isn’t worthwhile, then feel free to move along. There’s some exceptional film criticism freely available on the internet. I recommend Philip French in The Observer.