Idolator

Annnnnnnnnnnnd it's gone already.

you know it's hard out here for a commenter.

That's good satire, there.

Surely, he's not serious?

But really, aren't both of those bands just cheap knock-offs of She Wants Revenge?

Sorry, but I'm confused. I missed something here.

Yeah, I definately feel the She Wants Revenge vibe from both interpol and Joy Division; it's like they just took the whole idea of SWR and subtely altered it. Disappointing really.

In 20 years, Rolling Stone will run an article wherin they declare "... While most of Interpol's sound was taken from predecessors like Joy Division, this NYC band's triumph was refining all that gloom into better tunes (you know, with hooks and sections that work as ringtones), thus bringing tasteful desolation to fans who's first allegiance is to Josh Schwartz."

What's that band naming game we were all playing a year ago? I suggest we start it back up.

She Wants Revenge With A Knife!

Sounds like a pretty fair assessment to me! Why do people think Ian Curtis could sing?

It's like the internet WANTS me to hate itself

I suspect that, like me, he is probably just 'too young' for Joy Division. Derivative as it may have been, Turn on the Bright Lights was, for a certain group of people, a 'perfect' album within the context of the time it was released. I understand that Joy Division is 'good', and people of a generation or two before mine tell me that they're important and I'm supposed to like them (not unlike RS's boomerism, eh?) but it just lacks the contextual meaning that TotBL has for me, and my appreciation of Joy Division's music is limited to an objective judgment of a piece of art. There's little excitement for me in hearing Joy Division, because I've heard the things they've done through the work of other bands, but in a more personally meaningful context. It's the same general reason I've never really been able to get interested in the Beatles.

I agree with the above. Once something's in the canon - and is there any doubt, after two movies, that Joy Division has been canonized? - it's easy to take it for granted. If you come up a generation or two later, you might respect what they did but prefer newer stuff from your time period.

It's like digging the Specials but being indifferent to '60s ska. Or liking the Cramps better than original '50s rock and roll.

I just love the kids who can't quite figure out which came first. I once heard someone in a club complain about this "crappy cover of NIN's 'Dead Souls.'"

Frankly, though, one of the previous posters was right - Ian Curtis wasn't a great singer. But dude could write. "Love Will Tear Us Apart" is in my opinion one of the best-written pop songs ever, and was certainly different for the late 70's.

for me the problem isnt so much not liking Joy Division as it is liking interpol - for they are godawful (plus the comparisons to joy division are mostly superficial anyway) it does strike me as a little odd that kids wouldn't like their favorite bands' influences much, tho, back in the early eighties when it seemed like everyone i knew was super into that two-tone specials/beat/selector stuff also LOVED any 60's ska/reggae they could get ahold of, everyone had some desmond dekker or the skinhead moonstomp comp and there seemd to be general agreement that it was awesome and somewhat better than the 2nd wave revivial stuff (same with people who loved the cramps also usually having a bunch of pebbles/nuggets comps they also played constantly).

Here's my favourite description of Interopl which pretty much sums it up (can't remember where I read it but it was a while ago).

Interpol - sucking the "joy" out of Joy Division.