Top 10 Worst Songs of 2015

So 2015 turned out to be the year for ripping off other people's work and just generally being dull. Apparently this year also has the distinction of having the most number of singles released, but unfortunately that just made this list all the more competitive. Here are those songs that may have been terrible enough to warrant an inclusion in previous years:

Kid Rock - First Kiss: Well this tasteless song sums up everything wrong with rock music these days. If you can keep your lunch down when listening to this then something is seriously wrong with you.
Miley Cyrus - Dooo It: We get it Miley, you think you're edgy. This time though you just produced some pretentious bullshit.
iLoveMemphis - Hit the Quan: I couldn't include a song on the list that was so bad it was actually quite amusing at times. That's if amusing to you is remembering the shit music they played at kids parties.
Madonna - Bitch I'm Madonna: I can't work out if this was a serious song. I can only hope it's a novelty song, as if not then what the fuck has happened to you Madonna?
Britney Spears & Iggy Azalea - Pretty Girls: Another song that was so bad I couldn't decide if it was mocking itself. Suppose it serves me right for expecting something after reading the title.
Beyonce - 7/11: Oh this one can just fuck off.

#10 5 Seconds of Summer - Hey Everybody

'5SOS' were a band that I actually included as an honourable mention in my best songs list last year. I thought this boyband had something different, and unlike the usual commercial bands they had a little charm and some actual talent to go with their babyface appearances. Turns out that 2015 was the year I discovered how wrong I was, and watching this video was confirmation that this boyband have just become irritating pissweasels that think it's perfectly fine to blatantly steal other people's work to fuel their own stupid egos. In case you hadn't worked it out this song is almost a carbon copy of 'Hungry Like the Wolf', so much so that the band actually gave written credit to 'Duran Duran', which is a big sign that this band are just petty thieves. Maybe I wouldn't have cared so much if these cockwombles hadn't make me hate their very existence by pissing around all the time, but the result is commercial crap that makes the band look identical to their arch rivals 'One Direction'; and that's not a compliment. The lyrics to this song for example are just a jumbled mess. On one hand it's an inspirational song about getting bye in life, but then we end up with a chorus that just contradicts the whole song:

Hey everybody, we don't have to live this way

We can all get some, yeah, we can all get paid

So what you say everybody? Gotta live it up today

We can all get some, yeah, we can all get paid

Somehow I don't think 'living it up' has anything to do with being hard up, but then what the fuck would these popstars know about being down on cash? Their solution is the best though, they plainly suggest that people who are hard up should just 'all get paid'. They couldn't have sounded any more obnoxious if they'd tried. But the thing I hate the most is that despite the release of songs such as this the group still don't consider themselves a boy band. Are they fucking serious? You could have blindfolded me and I would have just assumed the song in question was from the 'One Direction' back catalogue. The styles are fucking identical, so much so that '5SOS' actually toured with 'One Direction'. But yeah, I'm sure you guys think you're a proper, full blooded and serious rock band. Unfortunately I've never heard of a serious rock band that rips off 1980's pop songs, but that was the last bit of evidence you needed to deduce that these boys are just wankers.


#9 Rihanna - Bitch Better Have My Money

Oh dear, I guess this is what happens when a pop star is under some sort of impression that she's become a tough gangster. The cover alone made Rihanna look like a murdered prostitute, but that's nowhere near as atrocious as the actual song. The funny thing about this whole tough charade is that Rihanna herself has felt the effects first hand of what hardened thugs do after being domestically beaten by Chris Brown, so why the hell is she now supporting that message? In my funny little world making a seven minute video where you torture and brutalise another woman makes you look like a scumbag, not to mention a talentless scumbag putting on a gangster charade that just doesn't suit you. The sheer amount of shit you talk in this song still doesn't hide the fact that this is a piece without any style or substance. The lyrics for example are just woeful, and considering it took FIVE people to write the bloody words, none of which may I add were Rihanna herself, I find it amazing how unpolished the whole thing is. Rihanna has absolutely no right to start strutting around this piece like some self entitled big shot when she can't even be bothered to write even a single line of her own songs. That's not to say the five writers had any talent either, as these two lines will prove:

Louis 13 and it's all on me, nigga you just bought a shot

Kamikaze if you think that you gon' knock me off the top

The first line is just contradictory nonsense, and the second line is exactly the opposite of kamikaze. If at no point Rihanna didn't realise that these lyrics are nothing but absolute shit then she needs to get down off her fucking pedestal and maybe treat this serious issue with at least a shred of dignity. It's clear to me that she didn't care about this song at any stage, and neither her smashed up face apparently, as you're all for supporting domestic violence. However the biggest problem by far is how the song sounds. Everything. Is. Just so. Clunky. One minute Rihanna is shouting abuse down your ear hole and the next she's trying to harmonise at the same time. Chuck that on a simple and repetitive beat and the result is a machine gun filled with shit firing aimlessly at an ever decreasing target. Rihanna, you're not some god given badass. You're nothing more than an average performer whose power has gone to your head. Maybe next time you should focus on something that can actually be classed as music fit for human consumption.

#8 Justin Bieber - I'll Show You

No I'm sorry, the guy may have matured but he's still a pile of wank. The so called 'bangers' that Bieber has released this year include the diabolical 'Children' and this piece of shit. 'I'll Show You' has to have one of the most irritating melodies I've ever heard. It's repetitive, annoying, and doesn't compliment the song in any way. I'm not really surprised as the song was produced by Skrillex, and when one of his songs is described as an ear soar it makes a positive change from his usual standard of material, but having said that he's not all to blame for this failure; Bieber's voice isn't exactly brilliant, but that's completely overshadowed by the dull nature of this 'banger'. It's worse than just dull though, it's that dullness mixed in with the awful production that make this one of the most soulless songs of the year. There's no passion as ever in this Bieber song, it's just a vain twat getting all sentimental and covering his ass by spurting out bollocks with that voice that makes me want to punch him in the face.

Then we get to the drop, which these days seems to be mandatory in every song, but in this song particularly it's just a huge anticlimax. As per usual the bass drop ends up taking away any momentum the song did have, and being as this one didn't have much it leaves the listener with an empty song that contradicts itself at every second by wanting to be a slow methodical number one minute, and a house anthem the next. I don't know if Skrillex thought that this solemn number would ever fill clubs, but his input just isn't needed. As for the actual lyrics well they're just the final nail in the coffin full of excrement. Have a read of this attention seeking verse:

Sometimes it's hard to do the right thing
When the pressure's coming down like lightning
It's like they want me to be perfect
When they don't even know that I'm hurting

Okay Justin, you might not be perfect, however as your profession is listed as a musician I don't think it's too much to ask for you to at least produce a song that has some merit. This is just total garbage. At what point in my fucking life do I care if he's hurting? He's a fucking millionaire and I'm sitting here moaning about him over the Internet, so how are you the fucking victim? If you want people to stop comparing you to an irritating little twat then you need to do a lot fucking better than this piece of shit you egotistical little cretin.

#7 Ariana Grande - Focus

Come on Ariana, we've heard this all before. 'Problem' in particular comes to mind as these two songs are almost identical to one another, except for 'Problem' having a much better hook. I'm sorry but you just can't keep expecting to get away with a rinse and repeat formula, and that makes focusing on you a rather hard task. The worst part of this song is undoubtedly that hook. What the actual fuck were you thinking? Were the session musicians out that day and you had to improvise with a guy jokingly doing a 'Mr. T' impression? Don't worry though, you thought you could get away with that by questionably dancing. Seriously though, whoever thought that choreography looked good deserves a P45 tomorrow morning, as the finished product in terms of choreography and production aren't even close to being ready for consumers. My issues with Ariana are also justified by her constantly lacklustre performances. In reality the girl probably has a good voice, so why the hell does she need to sound out of breath on every record? This song in particular was notably unpleasant to listen to.

I really would like to focus on this natural talent that Ariana apparently has, but all I can see at the moment is an attractive girl constantly underperforming and getting other people to write her songs. FOUR people it took to write this generic bollocks, yet apparently Ariana is the one to be focusing on. Aside from being lazy and looking like a transgender Gandalf, Ariana has also fallen into the trap of writing a song for her so called 'haters'. As I'm apparently one of them I totally understand the logic of telling your haters you don't care about them by recording and posing for a song that takes a lot of effort and many studio hours to complete. Maybe I wouldn't care about the flawed theme if the song actually had a focus. It seems ironic in a song called 'focus', but the actual song is just all over the place. It tries to be so much more than just a generic pop song, yet in doing so makes it sound like one of the dullest and standard songs you'll hear this year.


#6 Fetty Wap - 679

If there was ever a song that perfectly summed up everything I hate about the rap genre these days then this is the one. Fetty Wap is a stupidly named talentless idiot who thinks speaking in an annoying voice passes for being a credible rapper. His signature feature is that he has one eye thanks to glaucoma, or karma as I like to think. This lack of depth perception thanks to a singular eye apparently transcends into his songs as well, especially this one that contains some of the most shallow and stupid lyrics I've ever had to endure reading. This is only the first verse:

Baby girl, you're so damn fine though

I'm tryna know if I could hit it from behind though

I'm sipping on you like some fine wine though

And when it's over, I press rewind though

That's right, Fetty rhymes 'though' with itself FOUR times. What a genius this guy is. The thing is that this lazy rhyming doesn't even make sense. You can't just add the word 'though' to the end of each line. This has to be the worst songwriting I've ever seen. Not only is this one of the most hateful verses ever created but it's also one of the most disgusting, and it doesn't get any better either:

I traded in my trues for some robins

He playing Batman, Fetty's gon' rob him 

No, that doesn't rhyme either, try again. This is the first fucking verse, and this trend continues throughout the whole song. All of this pain, and the result is only to find out that this guy has a gun in his supposedly expensive car, which doesn't at all make him look like an insecure asshole. As a rapper Fetty Wap just has to talk vaguely in time with the beat, but he can't even do that without sounding like an imbecile. He can't sing, he can't rap, he has one of the most annoying voices I've ever had the displeasure of hearing, and he sounds like he's constantly going to have a breakdown. I suppose that's an acceptable response to listening to this song, but this one eyed prick can just fuck right off. In his first year in the business Fetty Wap somehow managed to get three singles in the top ten. To put that into perspective that's the same number as 'The Beatles'. Fetty's songs don't get any less embarrassing than this train wreck, so why the fuck are people buying the work of this impotent whelp?


#5 Meghan Trainor - Dear Future Husband

I don't know what goes on in this woman's head, but after ruining the classic genre of doo-wop for everybody last year she's now decided to do it again this year, only this time blatantly copying an absolute classic. Yes, this assfaced whore decided to shit all over 'Runaround Sue', and only so she could write a song based on the fact that she's an agitating bitch with an annoying voice. Her personality is so hateful that she gives Jimmy Saville a run for his money, mutilating an already dead genre with her vile presence. And how does she do this? Well somehow she manages to make what was once an upbeat song into a mixture of dreariness and despair. There's no character or excitement in this, only a bitch who looks like someone taught a plank of wood how to sing badly. When you start comparing Dion's classic to whatever the fuck Meghan Trainor shat out then it soon becomes clear that Trainor's voice doesn't work on any level. A song like this shouldn't be about groaning and talking through autotuned verses, it should be about flow and style, which this song has absolutely none of. It's an amateurish forgery of an all time classic, only managing to show Trainor's ignorance at every opportunity. The only reason this bland song got any recognition is because of the controversial music video, which as per usual only makes Trainor even more infuriating. It's not the video that should get you angry though, it's the piss poor quality of some of these lyrics: 

After every fight
Just apologise
And maybe then I'll let you try and rock my body right
Even if I was wrong [Laugh] You know I'm never wrong
Why disagree?
Why, why disagree? 

You don't need a husband love, you need a fucking sex slave with that crappy attitude. If this is really how you feel then you're a self centred cow. But somehow the song manages to get even worse:

I never learned to cook

But I can write a hook

Sing along with me

What a desirable woman you are. If there's one thing we have found it's that you actually can't write a hook. And anyway, you only co-wrote the song, so stop it with your misleading claims that try and massage your huge shitty ego. Stop promoting yourself as some desirable goddess that all men clamour over when the reality shows that you're a pathetic and self centred bitch that only cares about yourself. These were lyrics that Trainor as a person stood by, so I feel it's my duty to inform her that she has one shitty personality. How this impetulant child's teenage diary became a hit is a mystery to me. This self obsessed cow is in no position start dictating her perfect husband when she looks like a horse's ass and has the personality of a narcissistic and pretentious bitch. Fuck you Meghan Trainor.


#4 Fifth Harmony - Worth It

'Fifth Harmony' are proof that if the 'X Factor' does one thing, it's not finding groups with any of this so called 'X Factor'. If as a group you end up producing a song as awful as this then you're NOT worth it; you're not even worth a single penny from even the most desperate of human beings. If there is a redeeming quality to this song then I couldn't find it. The redeeming quality certainly wasn't 'Fifth Harmony', who must have been named that because they can only come up with a fifth of an actual harmony. Somewhere in the song the five of them might have had a fraction of chemistry when performing together, but then as far as I'm concerned all five are just the one generic individual that thanks to the 'X Factor' now have an undeserved record deal. Only a group as shit as this one could somehow ruin Jason Derulo's 'Talk Dirty', and going a step below him is not something to be proud of. Even Jason Derulo doesn't repeat the title of his songs 36 times in a 3 and a half minute song. Even he would realise that doing that leads to a repetitive and annoying result that only emphasises how utterly devoid of talent anyone who was involved in this shambles has.

If Adolphe Sax had ever considered that his beloved instrument would be tortured so much in a song so degrading as this then I'm sure he would never have bothered with his invention in the first place. This song is an insult to him, an insult to the pioneers of music, an insult to the industry itself, and an insult to the people who work their asses off to produce something decent and get less recognition than these talentless individuals. Most of all though, it's a crime against humanity for people with functioning ears. It doesn't matter that this was never intended to be musical perfection, and it doesn't matter that this is supposed to a song about female empowerment, because at the end of the day the result is five self indulgent hoes trying and failing to copy a formula that died out years ago. Stop trying to pointlessly beat up men; I'm sure most men would happily beat themselves watching the video. If 'Fifth Harmony' aren't for you, and they shouldn't be, then 'Kid Ink' is also around to contribute absolutely nothing apart from my scorn. Just like the rest of this song he's got no talent, no personality, no charisma. This song is the musical equivalent of eating cardboard, only eating cardboard isn't usually accompanied by vile and hateful human beings feeding on the leftovers of a foul mess and trying to turn that into something commercial. What a fucking train wreck.


#3 Silento - Watch Me

What a fucking moron this guy is. If you've ever wanted to listen to something so utterly devoid of character and any star quality then Silento appears to be the right guy for you. Who the hell does this guy think he is prancing around in limp wristed fashion to a song that makes the most basic of Nokia ringtones feel like experiencing a full symphony orchestra? I don't know why it's suddenly become acceptable for primitive idiots like this one to lead the audience through a terrible game of 'Simon Says', especially when this version of the game ends up repeating the same commands over and over again until it become so unbearably annoying that you just admit defeat and pretend that this abomination doesn't harm your brain cells. Silento himself sounds and acts like an eight year old child, appearing to resemble a kid whose mum has just bought him home a bargain bucket. He certainly doesn't look like a credible rapper, despite having the arrogance to not even mention his name during the traditional rapper shoutout. Everything else is just 'watch me do this' and 'watch me do that', and afterwards the guy still has the cheek to expect me to take this pile of shit seriously.

Over the duration of the song we have to endure Silento coming out with such classic dances as 'The Whip', 'The Nae Nae', 'The Stanky Leg', 'The Bop', 'The Superman', 'The Duff', and of course 'The Break Your Legs'. Although if someone is literally offering to break Silento's legs then I'll happily watch and listen to that. Why stop there? Break his fucking neck for all I care. Chat shit get banged mate. Unfortunately a dance that wasn't in Silento's collection was 'The Originality', which is a shame as that might have improved this ridiculous and lackluster dance track. Repeating old dances in an irritating fashion does not pass as serious artistry, especially when the dances cited aren't even your own creation. This song is the magnum opus of pure plagiarism. The only time I would ever listen to Silento say 'watch me' is if the line after was 'be lowered into a shark infested pool'. This isn't just a stupid song, it's a song that can't get basic songwriting or integrity anywhere near right. As for the beat itself, well the beat doesn't actually exist. It's just a lone drum having to do all the work, which might be acceptable if you were playing on a children's keyboard, but on a serious song that's just ridiculous. 2015 will have to go down as the year when someone tried to take multiple dance songs and hack them into a product that wanted to be taken seriously. Of course that didn't work, only proving that if you try and rearrange a pile of shit without adding anything, the results are always going to be another pile of shit. 


#2 Rae Sremmurd - Throw Some Mo'

Oh god, last year's worst artists are back, and to make things worse they've teamed up with Nicki Minaj, the worst artist of all time. This hellish combination must surely exist solely to spite both me and humanity, with the only surprise being that somehow this didn't take the number one spot with this unbelievably bad excuse for a song. First of all the title doesn't make any sense, especially when that said phrase could be said in correct English and still fit in the hook. Just missing out half a word for the sake of it is something that pisses me off, as that's the key phrase in the song, so just being lazy with it shows a lack of care. It should be imperative to the whole spectacle, but instead it just ends up feeling like just another old rapper cliche. Maybe the reason the word 'more' was cut in half was because that reflects how bored Nicki Minaj sounds through the whole thing. She only seems to liven up when talking about her own ass, and the rest of the song is just her putting minimal effort into everything else. Her voice is still terrible even with this lack of effort, just not its usual aggravating self. In fact compared to Rae Sremmurd her voice is actually a pleasant reprieve from the autotuned mess that surrounds this plainly awful song.

Words fail me in describing the sort of moron that would actually pay real money for this shit. I just don't understand why anyone would enjoy listening to Rae Sremmurd perform anything, as they sure as hell can't rap, aren't even close to being able to sing, and when they do try and put some effort into something they sound like penguins being strangled. In all honesty I'd prefer a verse of Nicki Minaj reminding me of why she deserves a painful death instead of having a whole song dominated by these inbreds. Maybe Rae Sremmurd didn't have as much money as they claim and so couldn't pay Minaj enough for a single verse, which I suppose would explain why she sounds so pissed off. The rest is just generic rap crap that just uses the same formula as every other shitty rap song. It has the usual charming lyrics that go on about how these boys enjoy buying women with their undeserved fortune, which ends up sounding like 19th century American attitudes, but then I never accused these idiots of having any class. This song is so distasteful with everything it does that even writing a half serious review is angering me, but that was nothing compared to the horror that somehow managed to beat this turd.


#1 Manika - I Might Go Lesbian

Then I heard this one. Thankfully I missed the unpleasant experience of listening to whatever this is upon release. I can only hope I never have to hear anything so degrading ever again, and I feel this view is shared by normal human beings who were so disgusted that the comments section had to be disabled on 'Youtube'. I don't why I thought a song titled 'I Might Go Lesbian' would be anything other than pure crap, but how in this day and age to do you come up with a song that assumes people just flip sexuality whenever they feel like it? Maybe I wouldn't complain so much if this had just a tiny bit of quality, but it doesn't. What can I commend in a song so unbelievably bad as this? The lyrics are woeful, the base is repetitive and get in your face at every opportunity, the melody is so primitive and lacking any style that pinning the blame for this fault on a child would be harsh, and as for Manika herself, well she makes Rebecca Black look like the most credible artist in history. The talent, or lack of, on display in this atrocity is astounding. Quite simply there isn't any. All we get is an insufferable slut that pointlessly interludes whenever she feels like it with a voice that's enough to drive me mad, having the combined charisma of a Barbie doll, and failing to pull off anything serious with that screechy and whiny voice of hers. Then accompanying this bitch we have Tyga, who when not dating high profile underage girls is not making this song any better with his charmless and meaningless personality that could only have gotten him into the music industry through a miracle. Look at this fucking wordsmith in action:

Say no to drugs, but my pinkie ring's daring you

Fuck you like a rabbit, yeah, the rings ten carats boo

I'm the last male, he was just preparing you

I'm a one-of-one, who you gonna compare me to?

Well that's not fucking disgusting is it? Neither is it very good or respectable for that matter. It gets even worse after Tyga runs out of words he actually comprehends with his microscopic brain and starts rhyming the word 'too' with itself, and then rhymes 'one' with itself in case we were in any doubt that he's a shit artist. I'd like to think this whole production was just one big practical joke, highlighting how low the music industry has the potential to go, but instead the reality is we get a serious song that ends up sounding as bad as those cheesy Eurovision songs that go onto inhabit and haunt the musical graveyard. Never in my life did I think I would witness a woman using other people's sexuality as a cheap ploy to get the other gender to buy her songs, but that's before I realised how utterly devoid of class Manika is. That video alone proves just how much of a committed lesbian this self obsessed whore is, managing to reach the very bottom of the barrel of shit in the process. There is so little musical ability in this song that it genuinely blows my mind how something as tragic as this can be released as a credible song. If you were wondering how low humanity will go as a species, then this is one fucking good indication. This is so fucked up it's actually making me feel depressed.

This Year in Sexism

To celebrate another year in the gradual decline of humanity The Guardian has decided to round up the allegedly sexist issues of the past twelve months, and wow have they done a good job. Let's have a look at the most pressing issues for equality in this country.
___________________________________________________________________________________
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/dec/15/the-year-in-sexism-women-2015-feminism-misogynist
___________________________________________________________________________________
We start the year with a big one, a man having a different opinion to the author; blatant sexism. Maybe instead of crying over it you should actually read some of it, as once you stop trying to censor it you can see there's actually some valid points made in that article; unlike yours. I would have possibly included another article from February that encourages people to stop buying books written by white men, but then I'm not sure that can be sexist since that's a systematic oppression of men. Later in the year we were also told to stop buying music written by men, but please continue with your far more important points. March was even more shocking. Imagine telling a woman going through pregnancy that she might not want to take part in the election. You just shouldn't hear that kind of ridiculous comment, unless of course you're one of the many women who choose to take maternity leave. Of course being as this is an article about sexism you could argue how paternity leave is considerably shorter, but that would be a stupid argument to make in an obviously slandered article.

Satire and caricatures are also sexist apparently, as is highlighting the unusual fact that a leading politician is female. But as for a few minorities commenting stupid things on the Internet, well that's a new menace that's never happened before on the Internet. God this was a tough year. Also interesting to add that when women are included in real life sports it's also the feminists that have to start crying again.

Hmm I suspect the reason why the 'Women's World Cup' isn't just called the 'World Cup' is because that already exists, and not because of sexism. The innocent tweets that you cite are also just not sexist in anyway, yet alone harmful. I don't know why there's a huge outrage over the FA praising the women's football team, even if they did decide to make a reference to the quite shocking allegation that these female football players also have personal lives. Maybe this tweet wouldn't have made the article if the FA had just played it safe and claimed that the female players would go back to being superior than the men. Of course don't even dare claiming that men's football is more commercially viable and exhilarating than women's football, as you'll just get branded a sexist in this article.

The year continues, but still this author hasn't cottoned onto the fact that some people might have different opinions to hers, and of course there's no better way to highlight this than pitifully crying about them in slanted articles. That racist and sexist commentary you reference just doesn't matter, and actually you should be criticising the shit level of reporting instead of the trivial gender issues presented. That's the same with whinging about a list of things that men would like a relationship, that is quite clearly very different from the masses of lists on the Internet aimed at how men should be treating their partners. I mean how dare you try and improve the lives of men. You could have just ignored the tips as they're not mandatory instructions, but no, you had to cry sexism in the most childish way possible. I'll happily agree that 'The Daily Mail' is a pile of bollocks, but with the rest of the articles there's just nothing but wild accusations of so called sexism. If feminism really is about equality and incorporates both genders then why is being labelled a 'feminazi' sexist? I just find it funny how it's only when this insult is aimed at women does it get a mention in this article.

The year ends with the obviously sexist police campaign to try and decrease the number of rape victims. Why the fuck is this something to moan about? In my funny little world I thought that a campaign spreading awareness for combating rape is a much bigger issue than this so called 'sexist' approach. I don't know how it's victim blaming, in the same way I don't know how campaigns for people to lock their doors isn't victim blaming either. I have to inform you that there is a 'Don't Rape' campaign; it's called a lengthy prison sentence. Your method on the other hand leads to this blatant sexism that you completely fail at acknowledging. Apparently only telling men to not rape people isn't an inherently sexist solution at all.

May I add a few little extra entries for sexism I found throughout the year. Firstly there were feminists crying about the use of rape in a fictional television show, whilst simultaneously recommending 'The Kite Runner' in another article that focuses on male rape in the narrative. Only crying at how the female stereotypes are presented in a popular Disney film. Claiming that female rights should be promoted over the safety of children. And my personal favourite, claiming that money should be taken out of male earnings due to a theoretical wage gap. Funny how I also didn't see any mention of the ridiculously high rates of rape for women in India, or maybe the systematic oppression under ISIS, but yeah I'm sure these issues in the article are far more significant. This focus on trivial issues sums this article up perfectly, ignoring any male issues in the process. In reality this article isn't in any position to start lecturing people on sexism, especially when that lecture is trivial bollocks.

Are People Born Gay?

The debate over whether sexual preference is determined from birth has been going on for the last few decades, and with the growing number of homosexuals this argument isn't going to die anytime soon. Coming out of the closet and having sex with the same gender are very much choices made in life, but as for sexual orientation, well that's hotly debated over whether it's an unavoidable feeling from birth. If being gay is found to be predetermined then that would surely shift the public attitudes over gay issues, and so I will now briefly sum up the evidence found for both sides of the argument.

A quick internet search will end up finding numerous articles that claim a 'gay gene' proves that homosexuality is a genetic construct. In reality this is dreadful reporting, and the extravagant headline is made to overlook the actual scientific basis of the study that can in reality only make tenuous links. I understand that reporting like this would follow the biased agenda of these news outlets, making homosexuality justifiable in the eyes of many, but when you actually delve into the biological aspects of the argument it's not something so simple as identifying a single gene. The most commonly referenced study is one that involves the study of chromosomal linking between homosexuals. However the problem with this study is that there were just 40 participants, and from this small sample the scientists hypothesised that the gene responsible was 'xq28' due to similar alleles being expressed at higher frequencies than initially predicted. The reason that this study cannot be used as conclusive evidence is because it only finds a correlation, and a correlation that doesn't take into account external factors or explain how this single gene would be inheritable. The study never explained why this gene couldn't be expressed for bravery or femininity that you would logically assume were traits related to homosexuals. Even then the study only concluded that this gene was suspected to have an influence on homosexuality, but whether the cause is even genetic at all is still unknown. However to say that genetics are unlikely to have any effect on sexual orientation is also unlikely considering that scientists have successfully changed the preference of mice by simply manipulating their genetics, and as per most studies with live samples there is almost certainly a connection. In reality however you could write pages on the contradictory evidence flying around the internet, but currently there is no conclusive evidence that genetics are the primary cause of sexual orientation.

 Well I'm glad you think you were born that way love. I'm probably going to ask scientists though, as they might actually know.

Once you get passed the genetic arguments and on to evolutionary proof it soon becomes illogical to suggest that a 'gay gene' would stay in the human gene pool if it didn't provide a benefit to the fitness of certain individuals. There have been studies, and I say that word tenuously, that suggest that this 'gay gene' may actually have an indirect benefit to heterosexuals, explaining why the gene has remained in the human population. This may only be a hypothesis but it does provide a logical explanation as to why homosexuality could bypass the effects it has on reproductive success and still be prevalent in many individuals. This may also explain why homosexuality is found in hundreds of animal species, the origins of which are also mostly unexplained. In some species there has been an explanation as to the evolutionary benefits of this behaviour, with the most famous probably being the flour beetle that has sex with other male flour beetles to clear out any unfit sperm. Obviously a clear explanation like that has not been found in human society, but its commonplace in nature suggests there is nothing unnatural or unique about homosexuality in humans.

Have you heard of a man named Charles Darwin? I think you would benefit from reading his work if you think this is a valid line of argument to this dilemma.

Whilst there is certainly no conclusive evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is genetic, there is still no reason why cynics would use this as a justifiable reason to spurt their archaic prejudices even if being gay is a choice. I don't understand why liking men means being subjected to a torrent of abuse, unless maybe your story about coming out is amusing or cringeworthy. I just don't understand the idea that some people think that all of a sudden a homosexual would make a conscious decision in their life to like men at a random stage. I'm not gay myself so I don't claim to know, but from what I've heard people don't just weigh up the options before choosing, otherwise that would be like they were changing outfits for the day or something equally insignificant. A heterosexual can't just decide to be gay one day; unless of course they're an attention seeking liar with no self respect. I also aim this point to the members of the LGBTQ societies who feel their sexual feelings are more valid than others because they've identified themselves as gay for as long as they can remember, subsequently alienating a proportion of adolescents in the same way that a cult would.

You only 'believe' that nobody is born gay. Well that's very conclusive isn't it?

To conclude we don't actually have an answer to what causes people to be gay, so sorry for wasting your time. Being gay is certainly a natural process in both humans and numerous other species, but that's all the biological evidence we have to go on. We haven't yet discovered if being gay is determined by genetics, the environment or social surroundings, but the likelihood is that it's a combination of nature and nurture. Identifying yourself as a homosexual is certainly a choice, but my bigger question is why does this matter? Why should people's sexuality be determined by what nature intended?

Top 10 Grunge Bands

I must admit that grunge music is a genre I've never been a fan of. Maybe I was born too late, but I never understood why punk and metal coming together was such a big thing. However I do appreciate the raw sound and tenacity of this genre born in Seattle, and so now I will countdown the top ten grunge artists that managed to hijack the mainstream charts in the early 90's.

#10 Temple of the Dog (1990-1992)

Notable Songs: Hunger Strike (7/10) Say Hello 2 Heaven (7/10)

Quite possibly the worst band name in history, but also a band that actually contained a lot of potential talent. This was a band that fused together members who would eventually separate and form the much more famous 'Soundgarden' and 'Pearl Jam', who you can probably expect to feature later on. The combination of future 'Soundgarden' frontman Chris Cornell and 'Pearl Jam' founder Eddie Vedder is enough to give any grunge fan a massive erection, as for the first time there was what we would call today a 'grunge supergroup'. The immensely talented Chris Cornell only features on backing vocals which gives you some sort of indication of the talent we're dealing with here.

Despite all this the band only ever released the one album, which also happened to be self titled, making that possibly the worst album name of all time. The one album idea was always the plan considering that the band originally formed in tribute to the late Andrew Wood, who was a huge influence of the grunge genre before overdosing, which really is a rarity in the rock community dominated by loose cannons. However even though the band only ever released the single album, they still showed the ability to produce some quality material, and even though the idea was to commemorate a dead friend, the band still managed to produce some of the most cheerful songs in the grunge scene. For a band that only lasted two years they leave behind an extraordinary legacy.


#9 Mudhoney (1988-)

Notable Songs: Good Enough (6/10) Suck You Dry (5/10)

'Mudhoney' are a band that are somehow still going, producing solid performance after solid performance even after all these years. To grunge fans 'Mudhoney' are a talented band with many anthems to drool over, but to the majority of people this is a group lost into obscurity. In reality the band were very influential in the grunge scene, arguably being one of the first users of that intense and dirty sound that would end up becoming grunge in its raw and simple form. Their first EP in particular, the terribly named 'Superfuzz Bigmuff', has actually become one of grunge's most notable releases, and even got the band a decent record deal. Their ten studio albums since have been a welcome addition to the genre, but their shyness towards mainstream success means that this proper grunge band were never destined for greatness. 'Mudhoney' made similar bands like 'Nirvana' look like Virgin Cola in comparison, and as underground followings go this lot were pretty much king of the hill.


#8 Stone Temple Pilots (1989-2002)

Notable Songs: Plush (5/10) Interstate Love Song (7/10)

The 'Stone Temple Pilots' were actually a band that originated from San Diego, so for them to try and copy that iconic Seattle based sound of grunge was something that nobody was going to like. It was even more unlikely to work when their original name was going to be 'Shirley Temple's Pussy', but thankfully this band decided to work with a different acronym and actually achieved moderate success in doing so. Amazingly the 'Stone Temple Pilots' worked quite nicely together, and although they eventually moved away from infiltrating Seattle based sound, they were at one point up there with the most important of players in the grunge game. Their imitation was originally criticised, especially on their debut album 'Core', which really isn't a bad record; but try telling that to die hard grunge fanatics. The critics soon shut up when they heard the album 'Purple' that subsequently took the band to commercial success, bringing with it a savagery to grunge that even the boys from Seattle hadn't managed yet.

Because the 'Stone Temple Pilots' weren't from Seattle they could pretty much do whatever they wanted with a genre that didn't include them, and that's a good thing, as over the years this band have become one of the more experimental on this list, never shying away from fusing different genres. They understood that grunge needed to evolve as a sound, and as such they sounded different, unique. These outcasts ended up as one of the most stereotypical grunge bands imaginable, proving the genre could travel states. Vocalist Scott Weiland tragically died the week before writing this, which isn't surprising considering his rock and roll lifestyle, but I thought this would be a timely tribute to a man who you could believe had seen the deranged shit he drones on about. The smack addiction that literally ended this man's life is at the fore of many songs written by him, suiting that monotone depression that is the grunge format. The man may not have been the most iconic figure on this list, but both him and the band are certainly worthy of significant praise for their contributions.


#7 Jane's Addiction (1985-1991)

Notable Songs: Mountain Song (7/10) Been Caught Steeling (6/10)

Before you moan at me I'm fully aware that this band are not technically classified as grunge, as they're actually just general alternative rockers, but as an early 90's band these guys were often lumped into the grunge style and may have also had a big influence on the hardcore grunge bands in the business. Their work clearly has grunge elements hidden within, and being as 'Jane's Addiction' were one of the first alternative bands to find big success I don't think you can argue that they didn't pave the way for the grunge explosion of the early 90's. Vocalist Perry Farrel himself dubbed their sound as part of the 'alternative nation', and that's essentially what grunge became in the end. As for the band, well they prefer screeching their lyrics into the ears of listeners rather than groaning, and I prefer the noises made by a band that sound like they want to be taking acid rather than blowing their brains out. The love of hair metal equals charisma, and that's something you don't get with many stereotypical grunge bands that bow to convention. 'Jane's Addiction' are now most famous for masterminding the hugely successful Lollapalooza gig, so even if you don't recognise them as a grunge band you can thank them for that.


#6 The Smashing Pumpkins (1988-2000)

Notable Songs: Today (7/10) 1979 (7/10) Cherub Rock (7/10)

Oh I'm sorry, I know I've broken the rules again by including a band that aren't technically grunge, and yes I know they've turned their back on that rock heritage lately, but I don't fucking care. I like 'The Smashing Pumpkins', and their music is often compared to grunge artists, so if your insufferable opinion can't handle that then please feel free to make your own list. '1979' and 'Today' are classics in the alternative rock genre, and as for the 'Mellon Collie' album, well that brilliant album with an emphasis on grunge elements propelled the bad to stardom. Just because this group don't bow down to grunge conventions doesn't mean you should instantly discount them from having any influence on any Seattle sounds.

Grunge music doesn't have to sound like angry hipster bullshit, and 'The Smashing Pumpkins' proved that you could actually transform alternative rock into something that actually sounds pleasant to listen to. You don't have to hate yourself to enjoy this style of music, as removing punky elements make everything far less savage, far less pretentious than endlessly wailing on about life's problems. That's not to say 'The Smashing Pumpkins' don't incorporate hard rock into their work, far from it in fact, and the guitar centered work this band have produced is by far their best, unfortunately no longer dominating their recent albums. 'The Pumpkins' are an underrated band if truth be told, and one that manage to sound completely unique in a samey genre.


#5 Soundgarden (1984-1997)

Notable Songs: Outshined (6/10) Black Hole Sun (7/10) Hands All Over (6/10)

A band famed for putting the punk into grunge. 'Soundgarden' were never shy about wailing out a moody number for their self pitying fans, but that feeling of a band that just made it out of a high school group was an instantly relatable feature that made grunge so relatable to the miserable masses. 'Soundgarden' are often said to be the grandfathers of the grunge scene, and although that's mainly due to them being the first to get a major record deal, it also has something to do with their sound that has now become atypical of the grunge format. Aside from being pioneers of the genre, they're also a technically sound band that like to combine classic hard rock with some heavy metal, which as a combination is one that excites me greatly.

'Soundgarden' were a band that could actually play their instruments well. I know that was once a common thing in rock music, but as the genre became more commercial it unfortunately became a thing to praise. The four gifted individuals played off of each other nicely, and the result was a mix of powerful vocals and powerful riffs that expanded on the classic formula of hard rock. 'Soundgarden' were a little different however, and could go from brutal savagery in songs such as 'Hands All Over', to drug inspired nonsense in songs such as 'Black Hole Sun'. The album 'Superunknown' is where their best work can be found, and as debut albums go it can easily sum up the sound of this band in a nutshell.


#4 Pixies (1986-1993)

Notable Songs: Where Is My Mind (8/10) Here Comes Your Man (7/10)

A great band that nobody has ever heard of. The sound that 'Pixies' created would later become the core of what grunge was about, but unfortunately for these indie rockers they peaked too soon and instead had to inspire a whole genre instead of reap the commercial success. Listen to their work and you will find a cocktail of punk, alternative rock and metal melded together in a big shouty mess. In truth 'Pixies' were a band way ahead of their time, and it seems barely believable that they were making such characteristically 90's records in the late 80's.

The legacy of 'Pixies' is quite probably the largest on this list, even inspiring some of the great albums that we've still got coming. In terms of grunge and alternative rock 'Pixies' can pretty much claim they created the successful format with their catchy riffs complimenting an overriding dark tone that encapsulates the angst that the grunge era would focus on. As a concept they sounded a bit like a bodge job of many genres that shouldn't really work together, but the reality was that this brash mixture just sounded great. Their intense and unorthodox songs may sound like just another loud racket in retrospect, but the explosions of grunge came from the very explosions that 'Pixies' loved to incorporate into their songs.


#3 Alice in Chains (1987-2002)

Notable Songs: Man in the Box (7/10) No Excuses (8/10) Would? (6/10)

As a creative force in grunge, it's hard to argue that the kings weren't 'Alice in Chains'. Jerry Cantrell was a huge part of this success with his legendary voice, but for me his unique chemistry with fellow frontman and massive drug addict Layne Staley is the most impressive part of this band. Staley may have passed away in 2002, but in that time this powerful duo created the most striking band on this list. Only their harmonies could wash away the overwhelming emphasis on heavy metal that 'Alice in Chains' became known for, instantly becoming a fan favorite for those heavy metal extremists that would need a lecture on what a vagina looks like. I don't care about being labelled into that category though as I just love listening to unconventional bands, and as a metal based band 'Alice in Chains' became a noticeable diversion from the samey grunge format.

However once you get passed the powerful metal based riffs you get to a very technical band that used this simplistic core to diverge into powerful themes and styles that many grunge performers would find too complex to accurately portray. Their music is dark, deranged, and has the instant ability to send shivers down your spine. The harmonies are so powerful that there absurdity becomes a thing of beauty within itself. Bands such as 'Nirvana' may have been the flagbearers for grunge, but it was 'Alice in Chains' that bought the intensity. Their songs are filled with expletive filled rants and just a general hatred towards anything, which is a similar style to that which grunge thrived off of. The band may have faded into obscurity over time, or at least are nowhere near as popular, but for those that truly appreciate what grunge music had to offer the industry then you'll know that these guys kicked some serious ass.


#2 Pearl Jam (1990-)

Notable Songs: Jeremy (9/10) Spin the Black Circle (7/10) Who You Are (7/10)

'Pearl Jam' are a band that have risen like a phoenix out of the ashes over the years. Despite forming over the failure of other ventures and leading a career that has seen them make countless suicidal business solutions, they're still performing after all these years. Their debut album 'Ten' is their masterpiece. Not only is it one of the greatest debut albums of all time, but it's also one of the greatest albums in general. To this day 'Ten' still holds those strong messages that it always did, and songs such as 'Jeremy' can send shivers down your spine no matter how many times you play it. Like most of 'Pearl Jam's' work, 'Jeremy' contains poignant and powerful lyrics that mix into the dark themes perfectly. 'Pearl Jam' weren't a commercial band that sang about smelling like teenage deodorant; they were a band that sung about a kid blowing his brains out in front of the class, accompanied by Eddie Vedder on vocals, which is a prospect that allows deep growls to become powerful vocals. He's not the same as conventional singers like 'Beyonce' who thinks she's a huge activist for not buying an alligator handbag, rather he's a man that will happily wage a war over a topic he feels strongly about, whether that be animal cruelty or corporations.

'Pearl Jam's' work is essentially a scathing view of the world filled with intense numbers of pure angst filled grunge. Critics and performers such as Kurt Cobain may have whined that this is sellout grunge, but fuck them. 'Pearl Jam' are a different sound to 'Nirvana', and in many technical aspects they're far superior to what others in the genre ever were. 'Pearl Jam' are a pure rock band that don't produce pointless music videos or rely on interviews and PR to get into the public eye. You get the sense that this band don't care about commercial fame, only being in the business to make quality music; and this dedication and passion can be easily heard throughout their work. Unlike many grunge acts 'Pearl Jam' haven't subsided over the years, and still to this day keep producing material with a lasting impact. This band weren't a quick fad, and were one of the few in the grunge business that could produce genuine quality on a regular basis. If the grunge scene was the human body then 'Pearl Jam' would be the soul, and just like a soul the band have lived past their original lifecycle.


#1 Nirvana (1987-1994)

Notable Songs: Smells Like Teen Spirit (10/10) Come As You Are (9/10) Lithium (7/10)

You could probably see this one coming, but then you can't really argue that 'Nirvana' weren't everything in the grunge scene during the early 90's. The reason this list exists and the reason why you're bothering to read it is because 'Nirvana' were the band to break the mold, and although they might not be the most revolutionary on this list, they are certainly the most influential; maybe even the most influential rock band of all time. They were proof that any shit band borne from a garage could work, even converting people who would traditionally hate depressing rock music in the process. Being a fan of 'Nirvana' is now something of a badge of honor, showing that you appreciate good music. Kurt Cobain was the right man to come along at the right time, and so not surprisingly the album 'Nevermind' was a huge success. That album alone is a masterpiece, one of the greatest releases of all time, managing to kill hair metal and any form of classic rock in the process. 'Nirvana' made the glitzy world of showbiz obsolete for a short while, carrying a legacy that any other alternative rock band could only dream of. 

Technically the band may have had a few rough edges. The lyrics for example to many of their songs were just cut and stick jobs that had very little meaning, although you try telling that to the generation that have been inspired by Cobain's songwriting and you soon find out how little that actually matters. At one point the name 'Nirvana' would be symbolic to any garage band in the early 90's, but now their iconic name is being mocked by idiots who want to seem retro and indie to cover up their shallow and irritating personalities. It's a shame, as for a band that lasted only a couple of years it's quite unbelievable that they managed to define a whole genre, and arguably a whole generation as well. 'Nirvana' aren't just the greatest grunge band of all time; they monopolised the genre, giving a voice to social outcasts everywhere. As for me, well I've always found the name 'Nirvana' ironic. The term comes from the idea of a peaceful state of mind, and not only are Cobain's lyrics anything but peaceful, but in the end his mind ended up all over the floor.

Why You Absolutely Shouldn't Be Having Sex With Dogs

I find it amazing that with just a quick look on the internet you can stumble upon something as disturbing as this. Here is a video of a girl, presumably single, explaining why other girls should have sex with their dogs. Yes you read that correctly, and now for your benefit I'll attempt to analyse her views from my perspective.

1) Just because the Romans and Greeks have documented cases of people having sex with dogs doesn't mean it should be encouraged thousands of years later. The Romans and Greeks also had documented cases of slavery, gladiatorial combat and public executions, so should that be encouraged as well?
2) Well that's just fucking disgusting. I suppose if you get pleasure out of it then feel free to continue, but I would prefer if you didn't broadcast that view all over the internet.
3) Well yeah, no shit. I'd also like to inform you that you can also have sex with your own species without getting pregnant; it's called contraception. The wonder of modern life means that you don't have to indulge in bestiality to avoid getting pregnant.
4) Oh I'm glad there's only one documented case of somebody having a fatal allergic reaction. I'm sure the dog shagging community is huge so this isolated case is a rarity, but thanks for increasing the number of people I'm aware of that have died from having sex with their dogs. Also it's not true that having sex with dogs doesn't carry diseases. Dogs may not carry traditional human based STD's, but they do carry rabies, Q fever, toxocariasis, and Weil's disease, which are all arguably worse than the side effects of having unsafe sex with your own species.
5) It's been around a while, must be alright then. Malaria predates the existence of human civilization so I'm sure that too is a great thing to recommend to people.
6) You are correct in saying that bestiality is legal in some countries and states. The word 'some' is doing a lot of work in that sentence and might indicate that the majority of people view this sort of stuff as completely fucked up. For reference it's been illegal in the UK to have sex with animals since 1290, so frowning upon having sex with dogs is hardly something revolutionary in the civilised world.
7) Really? I would have never guessed that fucking dogs is something that most people wouldn't do, as a lot of people have at least a shred of dignity. If you're the sort of person that gets sexually excited over dogs then you are in a huge minority, and it's not hard to work out why.
8) I'm glad it's convenient for you. It's also convenient to murder everyone who lives down the same street as you, but you don't use that as an excuse to start breaking the law do you? How desperate are you for sex? If you want convenient sex then why not just get a human partner? Not that a human partner is likely after you released this video.
9) Of course they don't nag or complain, they're dogs. Unless you're an expert in animal psychology, which I highly doubt, then how the fuck do you know how the dog is feeling? You must be aware that dogs show emotion in different ways to humans, so for all you know the dog could be dying inside a little each time his tongue has to go inside you.
10) Fuck me, I didn't realise this scheme was some sort of sex slavery. If this makes you want to fuck dogs then I'm not only concerned for your wellbeing, but humanity as a whole. How as a species have we let this happen?

Just in case you do fancy a bit of fun with your pet after watching this then please first consider whether you have at least a shred of human decency. If not then bestiality might be a good thing for your life, but please don't assume that because something breathes it instantly means you should feel entitled to start shagging it unless you really are that desperate. Not only is this sort of bestiality borderline sadistic, but it's also really fucking disturbing and degrades humanity as a whole. So no people, stop fucking dogs and broadcasting it all over the internet.

Top 10 Worst Movie Musicals

I've already explained that I don't like the concept of musical films when I counted down my ten favorites. So here now is the much more competitive worst list that shows off the worst cases of pointlessly prancing around to music it's possible to imagine.

#10 The King and I (1999) (3/10)

You know a musical is bad when the head of Rodgers and Hammerstein decides that allowing this film to be made was the biggest mistake he ever made, and he's payed to promote Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals. Why anyone thought 'The King and I' would make a good animated film is beyond me; it never was suited to children, and despite the director making some changes aimed at children and not bothering with the rest, that was never going to change. The result is a film that's really fucking dull, only proving that dumbing down a classic work doesn't work in any way; a fact that many others on this list could have also realised before ruining popular musicals.

The biggest sin about this film however is that Warner Bros. got it into their heads that they could try and copy some of that iconic 'Disney magic' and put that into a lifeless film. They couldn't, and as a result the serious plot becomes overrun with stupid little animals that in my opinion would have performed better if the scenes were set in a woodchipper. But even the stupid animal sidekicks were nothing compared to the hideous romantic subplot that makes 'Titanic' seem like a great romantic novel for the ages in comparison. When you're not vomiting at the woeful plot you can at least enjoy some polished visuals, and some of the songs aren't too bad for a musical, although I still would never describe this as a decent animated flick. This film is certainly not the worst film in the world, just one without any joy or excitement. Not surprisingly the consequences of this dismal film was a box office bomb, only making back 11 million dollars from an original budget of 25 million. Turns out children can work out when a musical is shit.


#9 Glitter (2001) (1/10)

This film's release was the worst thing to happen to America in September 2001. But seriously, Mariah Carey did actually blame the recent atrocities for the terrible reception and ultimate failing that this film succumbed to. I can instantly see what she means; only a film as poor as this could make the events of '9/11' a more positive thing to watch. There is nothing I would rather not watch than Mariah Carey acting, except maybe her singing, but unfortunately for me this film has an emphasis on both. Only a person like Helen Keller could ever enjoy a film so painful to watch, and she's dead so it's no real surprise that this film bombed. I just feel sorry for Americans. Not only did they witness a terrorist attack in their own country, but now some of them witnessed horror on a different scale in the cinema.

I know I bang on a lot about films full of cliches, but this film puts the rest to shame. The plot and script are essentially one big cliche, even making the life changing event of death not seem meaningful in any way. Even the seasoned musician that is Mariah Carey couldn't sing her way out of some of the worst acting I've ever come across and also one of the most generic and bland plots in recent memory. Unfortunately Mariah couldn't even manage the singing part, screeching her way through multiple terrible musical numbers, only providing comic relief with how awful her whole performance is. Thanks Mariah Carey; thanks for ruining musicals for everyone. I never much liked them to begin with, but now even the lifelong fans of musicals will hate you. In terms of 'Glitters' this is the most harmful to young girls I know of; even worse than Gary Glitter.


#8 Grease 2 (1982) (3/10)

I never actually like the original 'Grease', and so for me the second one wasn't so much a disappointment, just an annoying and ridiculous spectacle that managed to be so much worse than the now iconic original. I admire the brave move of trying to mix up a proven and popular formula, but the new cast and new songs do nothing to impress me. In essence they feel like a cheap money laundering production, robbing the viewer of an original experience, dancing over the grave of the original and sucking all the nostalgia out the franchise. All this to try and get people to part with cash and it's no surprise that this film does not have the image or attention that the original gained. Toying with the themes of motorbikes and repetitive songs like a man dangling keys to grab your attention was never going to be a winning formula.

Maybe this film would be more memorable if it wasn't for the barrage of mediocrity launched at the audience, ditching genuine quality for a love of songs that you would only find free in a newspaper and the quality of acting that you could find at your local theater. 'Grease 2' makes the cardinal sin for musicals in that the songs don't compliment the narrative, and any excuse to break into song is taken like it was some afterthought that only came about because the original did it, so they just copy that blueprint and ignore any sort of creative integrity. The above song is an example of the musical genius at work in this film, although when I say 'genius' I really mean ineptitude. There's no chemistry in that song, no passion on display. Nobody making this film ever seemed to care, only wanting to make a quick buck on a winning formula. 


#7 Rent (2005) (3/10)

'Rent' is a good example of how a musical that works on the stage can easily be ruined by poor execution. Not only does the cover look like the cast of Hollyoaks if they lived in a mental asylum, but the music is also so bad that even Westlife would be appalled upon giving it a listen; and they have to listen to Westlife music. I get that this musical was meant to be more of a rock opera, but it somehow misses the point of both the rock and opera genres by a country mile. The primitive and repetitive songs take the fun out of this musical, making a mockery of the popular stage show. Director Christopher Columbus does a terrible job, and even for a 509 year old deceased explorer this is a shoddy job that feels at every moment like the director has the talent of a corpse. As apparently do the marketing team who thought that film cover is acceptable for a serious and cutting edge musical.

The main plot of the film, which is terribly executed, is based around pressing issues like sexuality and AIDS, although at no point do they ever feel important to the narrative. In all honesty I'm glad the characters in the film have AIDS. With the shoddy performances they come up with I can only assume that karma does exist after all; it's the least they deserve for contributing to such utter crap. Aside from the performances of the actors the rest of the film suffers from the usual cliches that plague many a musical. The whole thing feels pretentious, the story is crap and feels synthetic, and nobody apart from militant homosexuals could ever be moved by themes explored so badly, but then homosexuals like all musicals. Unfortunately this is a musical that annoys me, despite being technically nowhere near as bad as the rest on this list.


#6 A Chorus Line (1985) (2/10)

Just what the fuck was this? It's like the choreographer wanted to show everyone his love of gay cruises and watching amateurs making a fool out of themselves by dancing. I don't know what idiot thought pairing cheesy 80's music with a serious musical was going to work, but the result is like watching a crappy infomercial. How they then managed to balls up a concept as simple as that so badly is unbelievable, but somehow they managed to create a vile mix of shit that takes the worst sounds imaginable and then couple that with some no name talents to dance to it.

The problems stem from the choice of director. It's Richard Attenborough, a man who with the right film can show off his gifts, but in a musical I don't want the man behind the excruciatingly boring 'Gandhi' to give me a camp, high energy musical. Attenborough and silly musicals were never going to work as a concept, and the results are bright and colourful sequences being shredded into every shade of brown and grey imaginable. The energy of the cast is pointlessly wasted on a hopeless premise, but even the cast's passion seems to wane by the end. Hard to imagine that the original stage show was once the longest running musical in the history of Broadway.


#5 Burlesque (2010) (2/10)

The main problem with this film aside from the presence of Christina Aguilera, who could only maybe improve a burning orphanage if she was trapped inside, is that the whole production just isn't burlesque. A cliche ridden mess is what the film actually is, but that's not such a catchy title. The whole point of burlesque performances is that they should be nothing like cliches, instead being caricatures of conventional material, which this film never does. It's a pointless musical that only showcases how annoying Christina Aguilera is in any film. All she manages to do is copy Mariah Carey's example and wail herself through various solos, contributing heavily to the cheap and lousy production of this film. 'Burlesque' has the audacity to try and remind the audience of a golden age in showbiz, yet only serves as a painful reminder that a selection of films never know when to shut down their frankly amateurish cast.

As a technical musical this film has zero quality. The dialogue is painful just to listen to, as are the songs, as is watching the quality of acting. If for some people this constitutes some sort of innocent charm then those people need their heads examined. There's no substance to this film, nothing to make it stand out from any other average production. Admittedly this film has Cher in it, who's mannequin like appearance at least make her standout, but not her lackluster performance that should be of little interest to anyone with eyes. At no point during watching this did I think it was ever worth making; it's not entertaining, and it only succeeds at being of some comic value due to how poorly some of the technical aspects are executed. But then again I'm not a menopausal woman who might on occasion be the only demographic to get a kick of this shitheap.


#4 Phantom of the Opera (2004) (3/10)

Joel Schumacher, famous for ruining Batman for everyone, now decides he's going to ruin an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical. It turns out to the surprise of nobody that when you take two of the most unpopular entities in the universe and try and make a musical about them they create a pile of shit. Who knew? Well actually the people that paid money to see this highly anticipated film and watched in horror at the results. Okay there might be a few nice visuals to occasionally gaze at, but this handsome facade is one that hides a deep underlying layer of crap that replaces any form of art throughout any of this film.

I have admitted in the past that stage musicals are not my favorite thing in the world, but I would prefer watching 'Phantom of the Opera' in the theater where you don't get soppy romances and shallow characters that have zero presence in any scenes. This film is so one dimensional that iconic characters such as The Phantom of the Opera himself become just average characters, and that's amazing since his defining characteristic is meant to be that he's disfigured, which you would of thought would make the character at least a little bit different. In this film there is no fun and quirky world that the viewer can enjoy. Instead there's a world filled with dubbed vocals, boring performances, lackluster songs and just a lifeless feeling to everything. Gerard Butler and Emmy Rossum in the lead roles are just hopeless, and Schumacher managed to drill the final nail in the coffin with his abysmal directing.


#3 The Wiz (1978) (1/10)

This embarrassingly low spot on the list isn't taken by the actual 'Wizard of Oz' sequel which everyone loves to hate, rather the African American response to an absolute classic. For whatever reason, probably money, Motown decided to hijack the successfully legacy in what may just be one of the most significant films of all time by spending a lot of money on stupid stuff and just generally ruining a family favorite. If the lazy story that has no real differences to the original doesn't leave a sour taste in your mouth then the terrible songs that shit on the originals certainly will. It seems amazing to me that there are two musicals that manage to be worse than this considering that in terms of huge steaming dumps of excrement this is a gigantic and rancid pile of the stuff. The original 'Wizard of Oz' made me realise the wondrous things that could be achieved through cinema, where as 'The Wiz' makes me seriously question why cinema was even invented in the first place. There's no sense of wonder or fantasy, just boring scenes with weak, rip off characters that never once feel exciting or interesting.

I don't know what idiot decided that instead of Oz, this film should be set in New York, but I want to find out why that person thought that New York could even compare to any fantasy realm. Even worse is when you populate New York with not Judy Garland, but Diana Ross, famous for not being an actor. Not surprisingly Ross can sing perfectly fine, but the iconic role of Dorothy is now transformed into some annoying and stereotypical crazy black lady, and nobody wants that. I never thought I would see the day when Dorothy would become annoying as a character, but Diana Ross managed it mere decades after the original film's initial release. The rest of the cast aren't much more talented, and there's even an appearance from Michael Jackson as 'Scarecrow'. Of course now he's known as the 'Scarechild', which might be why the above clip shows him being crucified by bad dancers dressed in terrible costumes that you might find in a primary school nativity play, but that would be disrespecting both amateur nativity plays and arguably the best scene in the entire film. 'The Wiz' ended up losing 10 million dollars at the box office, which at least restores some of my faith in humanity. It will at least make Hollywood think twice before spending stupid amounts of money on crappy musicals with expensive costumes and terrible dancers.


#2 Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (1978) (-5/10)

In the iconic words of Kirk Douglas "YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP! AH, DAMN YOU! GOD DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!" But this was worse than blowing up the Statue of Liberty. Not only did this happen in real life, but Hollywood actually decided to comprehensively ruin what is possibly the greatest album of all time. This damnation is done in such a painful way that even die hard musical fans will be left squirming, let alone what it will do to people who enjoy quality music. Nobody in the history of the world has ever wanted to see some of The Beatles' greatest work get ruined by the fucking Bee Gees, or worse still watch this crime against humanity that misses the entire point of the revolutionary album. Okay it might occasionally put a smile on your face with just how awful the whole spectacle is, but then you come to the sudden realisation that they're actively burying great art with some utterly dreadful performances from the huge cast that somehow manage to ruin timeless pieces with shameless ripoffs.

The only thing that the two entities do match up on is that they're both revolutionary pieces of art. However this film is revolutionary because of just how embarrassing the whole thing is. The results are a disgusting atrocity that recycles tired old cliches, shits on musical heritage, embarrasses a whole generation of music lovers, produces some truly unbearable songs, makes a less coherent plot than the actual album and completely miss the point and tone of any songs in the album. What fucking idiots thought they could rewrite a legend when they couldn't even get the basics right? Listening to The Bee Gees covering 'A Day in the Life' has to go down as one of the worst moments in my life, and as for Steve Martin's take on 'Maxwell's Silver Hammer', well that has to be seen to be believed. Actually don't watch it, all it will do is make you doubt humanity as a whole.


#1 Mamma Mia (2008) (-15,000/10)

As a human being I can never forgive myself for watching a single second of this shambolic film. Over the years I have seen many disgusting videos on the internet that often involve people being beheaded or mutilated, but none of these videos have the same shock factor as watching the crime against humanity that is 'Mamma Mia'. Why Meryl Streep and Pierce Brosnan haven't been hanged yet is nothing short of a miracle, as they at least deserve some form of capital punishment for their respective performances. Just listen to the song above; I know it was never going to be musical perfection, but how can an ABBA song manage to get that much worse than it already is. Brosnan straining to find notes that aren't even technically challenging is the tip of an iceberg made from shit, and that scene featured above wouldn't have even been acceptable in the 1970's when ABBA were at their peak. Even past the terrible renditions of popular songs this film struggles with a basic romance. That romance ends up being both hideous and a jumbled mess, only highlighting why actors, who at no point in their careers would be considered musically talented, such as Brosnan should never go near a fucking musical. I wasn't aware that music could be destroyed in such an offensive way, but this is proof that humanity can plunge to new depths if it means inflicting untold misery unto millions.

You won't hear me say this often, but for once I beg of the director to just dub the songs. Not even in the dodgiest karaoke bars in the country have I heard some amateurs murdering a musical that wasn't even any good to begin with on quite this scale. If I ever witnessed a film as terrible as this in real life it would be that pile of vomit outside the karaoke club, containing the murdered and mangled lyrics that show an utter disdain for the concept of musical theater. 'Mamma Mia' couldn't even get the dancing part right either, and it appears to have been lifted from a children's cartoon. The pacing and the plot are also cataclysmically poor, but the acting is the worst; there's no charisma or charm on display. To say anything this film did was charming would be the biggest lie ever told as in reality it's about as charming as a spreading tumor on a child. Somehow this atrocity managed to be successful; and that fact alone is enough evidence that population control would be a beneficial purge on society. I honestly don't understand how people can voluntarily be put through this kind of inhumane torture. Personally I would much rather have malaria injected into eyeballs than watch a single second of this soul-crushing horror.

Can The World Run on Alternative Energy Sources?

The first issue in this argument is defining what actually is an alternative source of energy. In this article alternative energy sources will refer to renewable sources that will hope to replace fossil fuel burning methods that are not only harming the planet but have a very limited life cycle. The forerunners of the new renewable initiative are wind and solar power, which although not without their flaws are realistically the biggest prospects for a planet totally reliant on alternative energy sources. In the last few years the cost to produce and operate wind and solar farms can now compete with the burning of fossil fuels, and as a result many richer countries are investing more and more into what they think is a potentially subsidiary to unsustainable energy generation. Countries such as Norway have even managed to generate 98% of their energy from renewable sources, in contrast to counties such as the UK that generate just 12%; although that figure is set to increase in the near future. The fact is that in terms of generation alternative energy sources can evidently produce enough energy to supply a whole country, but for the world to run off of renewable energy there would still need to be a drastic change in the domestic and transportation uses. Cargo ships and aeroplanes are two imperative parts of modern life, yet are nowhere close to being ran off of renewable sources, and couple this with an increasing energy demand and in the near future the answer looks negative.

The global trend shows a world increasing in the reliance of fossil fuels.

At this current time alternative energy sources have some big disadvantages. The problems stem further than simply the immense cost to implement a system with even a hope of generating enough power, and rather ironically there is still the issue of renewables having a detrimental effect on the local environment. At this current time it's simply not true to claim that any energy generated is carbon neutral considering that the manufacturing of huge wind turbines is a process that requires a heavy emphasis on fossil fuels, and that's a rather minimal effect on the environment compared to say biomass, which would need approximately 10% of the world's total land area to generate enough energy on a global scale. To put that figure into perspective 10% of the world's land area is currently used for agriculture, and when you consider the environmental impacts of farming then you start to realise that alternative energy sources really aren't all that good. Other alternative methods don't get much better either. Hydroelectric power requires huge dams that destroy not only aquatic ecosystems but the whole surrounding area as well. Wind turbines are hugely expensive for their relative power output and murder anything that flies in the vicinity, generating a lot of noise in the process. Ethanol is a net energy loss that takes 70% more energy to produce than it can theoretically generate, and both tidal and geothermal are reliant on the local environment which doesn't make them a global solution.

Even after you go through the individual faults of each alternative method there is still the combined issue of reliability. Unlike fossil fuels alternative energy sources are not consistent, applying especially to wind and solar power that wouldn't be able to adapt to power influxes at times when wind and sunshine levels are at their lowest. It's no good saying we should simply store energy for these instances since we currently have no way of storing that amount of electricity, and you can't run on backup generators since they would be idle most of the time, and what business would want to operate a powerplant that's losing money the majority of the time? Even the richest governments on the planet would agree that financially that solution isn't sustainable in any way. In a world that relies on alternative energy sources there would be a high possibility of blackouts, and in modern society an event like that would be catastrophic.

 You can't deny that despite their various downfalls, energy generated from fossil fuels have been very effective in the modern world, and getting nations to switch to alternative sources is a tall order.

An even bigger problem is trying to get the world to stop relying on the very effective and readily available fossil fuels. Sure the prices of fossil fuels will keep rising at a steady rate, but it's very hard to suddenly adopt a new energy strategy when you already have a system that's cheaper and more efficient. Why would a country such as Saudi Arabia want to switch to alternative energy sources when their economy practically runs off the oil industry? Abandoning the fossil fuel system would not only send various markets tumbling, but also lose national economies thousands of jobs. I'm not saying a gradual phasing of the global energy mix would necessarily be a bad thing, but to say the world can run solely on alternative sources is misguided. You try telling China, a country that burnt four billion tonnes of coal in 2012, that alternative energy sources would be a better solution for their ever expanding population, industry and economy. Telling British citizens that electric cars are better for the environment than their petrol powered equivalents did very little to increase sales, so why would the Chinese government think any differently? Electric cars out of interest are a very good way of showing the lethargic attitudes of the public towards alternative energy. Only 119,000 electric cars were sold in the US throughout the whole of 2014, by far the biggest global market for them, yet still dwarfed by the demand for cars powered on fossil fuels. Electric cars simply aren't ready to replace or even compete with conventional methods at this current time, and that's the same story with the majority of alternative energy schemes.

It's hard to imagine an overpopulated city in a poorer country reliant on alternative energy in the near future. The prospect simply isn't sustainable or appropriate technology for a developing country.

But the biggest problem by far is implementing alternative energy solutions into poorer countries. How a developing nation is supposed to switch to sustainable energy sources when they can barely manage with burning fossil fuels is something that needs to be addressed. The original question can quite simply be answered with a huge no if developing countries are taken into account, as alternative energy sources can only be funded by economically advanced countries with an already solid energy supply. Not only could poorer countries not afford huge fossil fuel saving schemes, but they don't have the ability to implement technology that is way too advanced and expensive to maintain. I'm not saying that it's impossible for less developed countries to make a contribution, and in fact countries such as Lesotho generate electricity solely through alternative methods, but unfortunately that's an anomaly caused by exceptional circumstances and only on a small scale. The reality is that fossil fuels are a necessity for developing nations, and governments in these areas have far bigger priorities than the threat of global warming.

Alternative energy sources are possible in developing countries, but nationwide programmes are very unlikely to be funded by governments that have other priorities with limited resources.

For alternative energy to become a global reality there would have to be a level of acceptance from both society and world powers. If there is no demand for initiatives such as electric cars or cleaner energy solutions then there is no hope of their even being widespread coverage. At this current time there are steps being taken so that more economically developed countries are creating a demand for this expanding industry, but the figures show that this method of generating power is still in the minority, and will continue to be until further research and refinement is undertaken. Even in the near future it's unlikely to see a shift towards alternative energy sources for personal transport, and despite the global trend increasing for these expensive product I have to conclude that in the near future there is no realistic chance that even the developed world could run on alternative energy sources alone. Statistics show that fossil fuel use was the same today as it was ten years ago. It seems that only when humanity does deplete the Earth of fossil fuels then a forcible change will be noticeable.