| |
|
Oh, Jesus.
It's George Michael. He's made a career out of being a cuddly 'deviant' even when he was 'in.'
But what do we think of it? Is it interesting?
It's a poor song, with vaguely interesting production. I think it's telling that there are all these rumours that Daft Punk are behind it.
And it's interesting that George, too, is using the bootleg phenomenon for kudos (and of course, the fact he was told "you can't 'Get Your Freeek on' the single.." [ahem] adds further outlaw cachet...
Is it a challenge of radically queering? Blatant exploitation of sex to sell records? An attempt to rebrand himself again? Aging homo dadpop?
None of the above. It's just a dull song made a bit more 'interesting' by being encased in rubber, if you ask me.
I don't see what all the fuss is about George being some radical sexual terrorist.
Frankie Goes To Hollywood were always much more subversive, and the music was better too. |
|
|
