week 2:
for love of mixtapes; god is a dj (and his name is fred); wyclef returns; A-HA RETURNS (!); the twenty greatest songs ever scientifically determined by a three man panel consisting of me, myself and i; oh, and, boobs.

week 3:
get drawn to the magnetic fields; three movies that are grossly overrated; some of the greatest movies...ever; xtc murders love...again; james brown breaks out in a "cold sweat"; morrissey and springsteen...separated at birth?; i bare my soul...again; and MORE!

week 4:
gladiator slays me, eminem and xtc reviews, a new look!, i poke fun at my own writing, the inmates take over the asylum, and MORE!

other blogs i like:
(because they're out there, you know)
nylpm
blue lines
josh's blog
westernhomes
log.nu
skykicking
pearls that are his eyes
catherine's pita
public blog
i drank WHAT?
cultural artifacts of the moment
frytopia

BRITNEY SPEARS - "SATISFACTION"

---

and why shouldn't britney sing "satisfaction"? i admit that, when i first heard the news, i was bemused by the idea of the pop princess tackling the stones' evergreen, but that had little to do with ms. spears, herself. and all to do with the great difference in the sound of the two artists. (then again, britney is teen-pop now as the stones were for the kids of the 60s.) from reading the cover story on her in the latest rolling stone, i'm to believe that the virginal britney won't be feeling the sexual dissatisfaction aspects of the song, but rather, as jagger joshed at the time, the "philosophical" dissatisfaction it expresses. and, again, why not? teens are never satisfied; for a more recent example, check out the replacements' "unsatisfied." britney's young and not always totally in control of her life and feels often as if she's being misunderstood. why, "satisfaction" seems like a potential anthem for her!

so, finally, i have the results in my midst. britney promised a track that would be "hot," and with her selection pop/r&b hitmaker rodney "i can't believe it's not timbaland" jerkins, a man currently working on albums for michael jackson and the spice girls, she couldn't have chosen a "hotter" producer. so what does it sound like then?

it starts off deceptively, the song sounding like one of the ballads jerkins has done for the likes of monica, but you don't really think the song would continue on that way, do you? of course not, so in comes the switch to mid-tempo mode, with jerkins' trademark drum programming underscoring things. in her favor, britney gives one of the least adenoidal performances of her career, making the intro "torch song" section sounding downright vampy!

there aren't many surprises to be had, really. jerkins throws in a little fuzzed-out guitar during the pre-chorus and the lyrics are changed slightly (the man who isn't a man cos he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as jagger has become a woman who can't tell britney how tight her skirt should be cos she can't tell britney who to be cos she's got her own identity. viva women's rights! oh, and she excises the verse about trying to make some girl. now that would've been interesting, ho ho). oh, and there's a key change and a shouty bunch of backing vocalists on the chorus a la "crazy", but this is teenpop, so what did you expect?

well, frankly, i expected more. this track really is something of a bore, and i can't see it becoming an anthem for anyone let alone ms. spears who really does little to prove she has her own identity, as she insists in the verses. the stones have very little to worry about; ironic that "rockers" like the stones exercised more pop smarts than la spears. oh well, chalk one up to opportunities missed.