Portishead has fallen into this category with their latest release, the first in 10 years, aptly titled Third. However, after numerous spins, I find that my skepticism at whether or not this is a washed-out comeback to pay the bills has washed off. Third is a competent album in its own right. The years have altered the band's sound in many ways and much to my liking; Third sounds little like their prior trip-hop efforts Dummy (1994) and Portishead (1997). I'm certainly not the first reviewer to state that, with Third, Portishead has gone a route more along the lines of industrial with a very dark aesthetic. There's actually a rather broad range of stylistic choices to the music.
Opening track "Silence" starts with a quick beat and some ghostly synths, cutting off abruptly. "Hunter" is much slower with an ominous progression. "Nylon Smile" features melancholy lyrics paired with a a creepy, almost claustrophobic music despite its minimal use of instruments. I love the way it ends, with all the music cutting out, leaving Beth Gibbons' voice hanging on the last few words: "I never had the chance to explain exactly what I meant." Progressing to "The Rip," we move to slow progression, quiet guitars, synths faded in about two and a half minutes in, and the return of those melancholy lyrics. Make no mistake, it's a pretty bleak record, not meant for cheering you up. If there's a track that doesn't particularly interest me, it's "Plastic." At least not until 1:40 in. That's when it shifts gears and gets intense, only to go back to its meandering. "We Carry On" is quite danceable. "Deep Water" stands out from the rest by being a quiet little acoustic number that sets us up (or off balance) for the next track, without argue the best song on the album, the biting electronic industrial "Machine Gun."
There's a reason "Machine Gun" was picked as the first single: it's the most intense song on the album and damn good at evoking an emotional response. "Machine Gun" consists mostly of synthetic percussion in a blistering rhythm, paired with Gibbons' haunting voice; it's a powerful combination. If you take nothing else from this album, at least take "Machine Gun." The only flaw in this song is what my friend Frank (Systems of Romance) refers to as a "John Carpenter score" keyboard solo for a closing (he liked that part; I'm not crazy about it). While a tad lame, the rest of the song hits hard enough to make that solo fairly easy to overlook. It's a tough track to follow, but "Small" manages to hold its own. "Small" is actually a bit of an oddity, starting slow and featuring a synthesized violin sound, organ vaguely reminiscent of The Doors and a echoed guitar riff halfway though that calls up Pink Floyd. The test pattern noise at the start of "Magic Doors" is annoying as all hell, but the rest of the song isn't bad. "Threads" is a great late night cruise home track with its creepy high-pitch sound running in the background and the groove the guitar and bass get in; wait for the thunder on this one.
Portishead is very much driven by the mental image created by listening to their music, and Third creates images of dark, barren cities and flickering street lamps at night before a rainfall. I find the emotional ambiance to the music and Beth Gibbons' voice to be quite effective and conjuring this image and setting me adrift in this alternate world.
To be honest, I didn't really like the first two Portishead albums. That variety of trip-hop/electronic music never appealed to me that much. But Third grabs me in a way that I find difficult to describe. I like a band that shows growth and departure from what they've done prior (see Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds, His Name Is Alive, Tom Waits among others). Even then, I find Third to be something that needs to be warmed to. Initially, I thought it was boring, but it holds up better under repeat listens. Don't dismiss it on the first, second, or even third listen; keep spinning it.
The liner notes are a bit sparse. Open the jewel case, slide out the sheet, and we unfold it to find an awesome three-panel panoramic picture of the image they were no doubt attempting to create in our minds. Power lines and towers, overcast skies, all very dark and in a deep shade of turquoise. We also get a list of songwriting credits and additional personnel, but there's not much else. There isn't much of a cover image to speak of (capital letter P with a number 3 layered over; turquoise background), and no other album art save the stylishly blurry back cover photo of the band performing. They could have done more to dress this up; seriously, they've been gone a decade! Show some spirit and make something damn pretty!
It took me awhile to warm up to this album, and, while I wouldn't call it the top of this year's releases, Third is most certainly a fine album and worth checking out. It's definitely a departure from their prior material, but consider it an embarkation into a new sonic journey. This cynic appreciated Portishead's effort; so why not at least give it a try? The band's blog states that they are excited about writing more new material, and I hope it continues down the road Third started, heading into a cloudy night.
Portishead's official website and myspace

9 comments:
its: used when showing possession
it's: used when contracting "it is"
I listened to this with Frank a while ago. "Machine Gun" is undeniably good. There were some other softer, more feathery acoustic with beats songs I liked and other songs I detested.
Portishead has always been a difficult band for me. Sometimes, I think they are genius. Othertimes, I want to strangle Beth with her mic-cord for her moaning poor-me mantras of melancholy.
Kevin, no offense, but I'm not one of your fucking students. I know the difference between "it's" and "its." We all make mistakes, especially when we've been staring at a computer screen all afternoon only to come home and do the same damn thing.
Yes, Portishead is a difficult band. I don't really understand the fascination they garnered prior. I like this album, recommend it, but don't think it is going to be making the top ten, given what else has come out and is being released later this year.
whoa whoa whoa. i never said that john carpenter line is a flaw. i think it's a nice nod in an already wonderful song.
the jury's still out on this record. i really want to like it a lot, but i never am drawn to listening to it. then again, i haven't upgraded my arguably flawed pre-release leak of it with a proper copy. can you help me, sir?
come to think of it, my reluctance to accept this album and give it my full attention is probably due to my love for the first two portishead records. sure, they're flawed too, but i grew up on 'em.
i'll give it another spin today. i'm in a funk, and that's always a good time to listen to portishead. call me a masochist.
You don't consider that a flaw, but I do. A minor one, and easily overlooked given the power of the rest of the track. I don't think I worded that sentence as to imply you thought it a flaw, but if necessary, I will re-word it to eliminate any confusion when I get back from work.
i haven't upgraded my arguably flawed pre-release leak of it with a proper copy. can you help me, sir?
That could be arranged.
I think "masochism" is an apt description for this album. Definitely the day for it; I'll be listening to it on the way to work.
I didn't mean to offend you, Chris. We all make typos and such, especially when tired. But given that the same one occurred five times here, I thought I'd offer a reminder. If you want work as an editor, and someone checked out your blog as example of your skills that could really hurt.
kla*: I appreciate your feedback, Kevin. This morning, I was in an uncharacteristically bad mood, and you came off pedantic in a way that really irritated me. Apologies all around.
As a note, I tend to check through posts hours, even days after posting, searching for little things like that that were missed before posting. Sometimes, I could use an editor myself. The eternal trouble with blogging being it all relies on one person to write and edit.
True that. I often have to rush away to something else when I'm done writing, leaving little typos that I forget to go back and fix, bothering the crap out of myself.
I was thinking about this whole instant self-publishing thing the other day. It is pretty remarkable, isn't it? How much of what we post would we actually compile and write if we were going through the costly and laborious process of real publishing? It's amazing. And you're right: it's all up to us, and we're often too computer-sick-and-tired, yet nonetheless addicted, to do it up to our own highest standards.
I can come across as an officious prick sometimes, I know. This is especially the case on the internet, where tone is lacking.
I have been in some very bad moods and not feeling right myself lately.
Post a Comment