iKON’s Music Video – “Airplane” Review

iKON – Airplane (Music Video)

Reviewed on November 28, 2015

off, to the requester, I do apologize for greatly delaying this review and for
not reviewing the song itself. I have been incredibly busy with university and
have only recently had the time to write this as I am on a short break, and
given the prior reviews of CNBlue and a Korean game, this review has been pushed back.
Nevertheless, thank you to the requester for sending this in. During this 4-day
break, I will attempt to catch up on reviews, and furthermore, with university
work and subtitling more Fiestar videos. After this review, I plan to wrap up
November with GOT7’s latest song, “If You Do,” and Hong Jinyoung’s “Cheer Up,”
a trot song. With the latter song, I very much do wish to review it as it is
trot, a genre that has been moreover miniscule and pushed aside as
“traditional” and of “the past.” But, with “Cheer Up,” though a slightly more
modern take is approached, it is all without compromising the trot genre itself.
Thus, I am very excited to review and share it as, personally, it induces
nostalgia (as shared before, trot and ballad were common genres in my childhood,
though specifically Chinese songs), but additionally, the song is very
beautifully composed and its lyrics possess an invaluable reminder to everyone.
The music video also further complements the song’s beauty. More will be
discussed in that review.

Returning to iKON, the group that is
supposed to have been discussed from the start, “Airplane” will be reviewed for
its music video. Given that I have not done a music video review in a while, I
do expect this to end up as a mediocre review, but I will attempt to maintain
quality. With “Airplane,” it is definitely an interesting music video, and even
after several sessions of watching, the complexity of the plot remains. In
terms of iKON themselves, they have been garnering much attention (and for more
than just music; I will address this later). There are seven members in iKON,
and if accurate, they are focused on hip-hop for the group’s genre (judging
from their current released songs). In fact, iKON has yet to officially debut,
but will certainly do so once their first performance occurs (it might have
already occurred; readers should correct me).

Since I will not be reviewing a song
directly from the group, I will hastily leave opinions regarding iKON in a
musical context. Truthfully, I have yet to hear an outstanding song from iKON;
at most, “My Type” is decent, but even with that song, none have proven to be outstandingly
impressive. If “Airplane” were to be reviewed, I would anticipate a lower
rating, or at best, a five. Positively, however, for what is appreciated with
the men’s songs, many—if not all—tend to be based on rhythm, rapping, flow, and
so forth. There are no exciting points for their songs, but rather, the listed
aspects are what are emphasized to attract listeners: pure music and not
manipulating “catchy” sounds. That said, iKON’s style of music is not what
deters me. In fact, that style is what attracted me to “My Type” in the first
place. Instead, it is the quality of their songs that are unappealing, examples
being the vocals, how certain sections in songs sound, and so on.

For what I wish to clarify, the
style of a song never influences review ratings—this being the genre, how
upbeat or calm a song is, and other similar details. As TWICE’s “Like Ooh-Ahh” addresses, the only biases that are
placed in reviews are the ones that dictate what is deemed “good” or “bad,”
such as with determining “good vocals” apart from “bad vocals.” These specific biases
are unavoidable in reviews and even music in general. In contrast, biases
toward music styles are certainly unacceptable for rating songs, and thus, I do
ensure that I rate based on quality and not likeability (if this is a word). Ailee’s “Insane” provides an example: “Insane”
scored quite well, but personally, while I admire the quality of the song, I
dislike its style as it simply is not my preference. Clearly, however, I did
not include that biased view as “Insane” scored well. Similarly with iKON, with
my earlier words, I do not wish to bash their style of music or even their
talents. What I am critiquing are the songs they have released, and this is significantly
different from critiquing their vocal skills or their music style.

Switching to another topic (feel
free to skip to the review now), as foreshadowed earlier, iKON has received
attention for more than music: they were involved in a bullying incident (I
will cover what happened). This was many months ago, and thus, there may be
readers who feel defensive at my mentioning of this; bringing up this topic is
seemingly mundane and seems to serve no purpose other than to degrade iKON. In
reply, I disagree: defensiveness should not occur, as to be explained, and
their news is certainly not something to quickly abandon. After all, discomfort
is generally a sign that discussing is in fact necessary. Before analyzing the situation
to uncover why it is a serious topic to ruminate over, especially once
accounting the general public’s reaction, I will first address the
defensiveness readers may have. Discussing iKON’s bullying news is not to
degrade any member or the group in whole. Unlike the past where, admittedly, I
have wrongly humiliated and shamed an idol in a Blog Opinion post, I will not
be replicating that mistake. Rather, I hope iKON’s incident will provide a
moment for reflection, education, and personal growth. In fact, what occurred
is less concerning than what resulted out of it—that is where I desire to focus
attention towards, as to be explained later.

To now showcase what did occur with
iKON so that readers understand, I will leave two sources versus attempting to
summarize the situation: the video, and a news article. Regardless of how one feels after
watching, there is a key point to remember: no one outside of iKON or their
company will ever know the truth to what did in fact occur. For all that is
known, iKON may very much love each other and are close and that, unluckily,
the camera was rolling when the group was at their most tired, stressed state
of mind. Likewise, however, this might have indeed revealed what truly occurs
in the group. No one knows. Realistically, iKON is probably a mixture of the
two points, as are any other artist group, and more generally, human being.
Even very loving, affectionate groups, whether it is Fiestar, Teen Top, or other
groups, have moments of arguments and fights. Again, in the most pessimistic
view possible, for all that is known, groups that are openly caring and loving
on camera may in fact very much despise one another. Now given that groups are
teams where every member shares a common goal of working hard to become popular
and to produce good music, it is likely that, even at worst, members do very
much sincerely care for one another—even if that just means seeing each other
as co-workers.

Overall, for the main point: it is
wrong to suddenly assume iKON are bullies toward specific members, or that B.I.
is horrendous person. Homogeneously, though, it is also wrong to suddenly
dismiss this entire incident and to claim that this was acceptable behavior.
Being accountable is what is important. This is similar to what occurred with TMZ and EXID: it is easy to label those TMZ
staff members as racist and atrocious, but what needs to be recalled is that
they are all humans—most likely even good humans, as hard as that may be to
accept. They may be limited in view with race, but to suddenly assume that
those staff members are all horrible people who wish the death of minoritized
groups is equally limiting in view (and this falls into the binary issue with
race regarding “racist and non-racist binaries”; an older review discusses this binary idea). Now of
course this does not mean being passive and compliant to everyone’s view—I very
much do and did challenge what TMZ said, for example—but it is about
understanding various viewpoints and still seeing others as equal beings and
not “less-than-human.” Thus, relating to iKON, this Personal Message digression
is not to bash them, but rather, to challenge what occurred and to, hopefully,
glean ideas and perspectives that aid in personal growth. Thankfully, iKON’s
situation is not in the realm of racism, though that is not to say bullying is
a minor topic in itself. For a final reminder to those who may feel defensive,
what matters is acknowledging mistakes that the group committed, and that both
iKON and fans should grow and learn from said mistakes.

Finally examining the scenario
itself, what did occur can be seen as unacceptable. Reiterating the prior
paragraphs, this is not to claim that iKON members are bad people (as binaries
never do exist, after all). Nevertheless, the hitting was certainly
unnecessary, as are any physical hits, and more so since it was far from being
playful, as observed by facial expressions and the force of the punches. On
this note, there is not much else to be said. Hitting is simply never
warranted, nor is inflicting pain to others even in an emotional way. After
all, the world would arguably be a lot better if people abided to that idea.
Specifically with the scene, there are many issues: the hitting in the first
place, as covered; secondly, however, the encouragement of hitting. It would
have been preferable if members did intervene, and not necessarily in a direct
way. The first hit should have been alarming enough and should have motivated
one member to step in with a remark of how that punch was too hard, and so on.
Every member can be held responsible, not just B.I.

Transitioning to the more troubling
aspect to this incident, as said, what occurred is not what greatly disturbed
me (but it still very much did; no one should ever be hit—unless if it is
playful and safe, such as with how MAMAMOO’s Solar shoves Moonbyul though then again Solar
shoves hard
). What is most bothering is the defensiveness that arisen
(as covered), but more specifically, a certain type of response: “Boys will be
boys” and “Boys are naturally aggressive; it’s in their nature to be rough,
they can’t help it.” In addition to evading a further discussion regarding
iKON’s behavior and holding them accountable, these related comments stretch
into a deeper, critical social layer: gender. Answering directly, “boy
excuses,” the term I will use, are never valid for anything—iKON related or
not. “Boy excuses” are, harshly stated, incredibly pathetic and too lacking to
ever be used.

When it comes to “boy excuses,” the
phrases carry an extremely false idea: that males are naturally aggressive;
that males are naturally leaders; that males are naturally whatever else.
Perhaps for other animals there may be a sense of “natural” male superiority,
but to translate that idea onto the human race, it is insulting. “Boy excuses”
downgrade the human race by assuming that human beings are nothing more than
wild animals that will always follow “natural instincts.” Optimistically, human
beings are far more sophisticated, and unequivocally, are not in the same
category as “natural creatures.” Until penguins walk around with smartphones,
develop a form of linguistic communications (if that is the right term; I am
referencing language, writing—ways to communicate), and casually listen and
share K-Pop with other penguins which all, by the way, would be actually amazing; I have a silly
wish that penguins will one day be domesticated pets, let alone have human-like
, then perhaps I will retract the claim of humans not
being “natural creatures.” Humans are in many ways above natural, and that is
not inherently bad nor should it strike as impossible to ever deviate from
“natural.” This position means that humans have the ability to shape our very
own existences so that, for example, everyone regardless of who they are can at
least live a happy life. But, likewise, it also means that an opposite route
can be taken: creating situations where only certain people benefit at the
expenses of other people. “Boy excuses” fall in the latter; using these phrases
merely perpetuate the idea that humans are “natural” creatures who lack
intelligence, and that males are excused to be aggressive without punishment.

On topic, the idea of males being
“natural” at whatever it may be are not natural ideas—humans are not “natural”
minus biology (of which is essentially solely our bodies; in fact, “race” is
not biological but rather socially constructed, as a review will one day
discuss). Humans are socialized creatures, and as a result, these notions of
“boys excuse phrases” are merely ideas that have been taught and spread.
Dissecting the idea of boys being naturally aggressive for example, if this is
true, then every male should in fact be aggressive, no matter the
circumstances. However, this is far from true, as the following example will
show: a boy who was raised without ever being exposed to violence at all.
Obviously, in the actual world this is near impossible to do without entirely
sheltering the boy; violence is constantly displayed, and specifically, boys
are relentlessly socialized to be aggressive, as seen by superhero shows and
“boy activities” of rough-housing and so forth. Ignoring this aspect, though,
if it was possible to raise a boy from birth to death in a utopian-like world
of no violence, he would never showcase violence as there was never violence to
learn from. This is analogous to how a person who is never exposed to Korean at
all from birth to death will never speak or understand Korean. To her/him, the
Korean language simply does not exist. Likewise, for the hypothesized boy who
grew up with no violence in any form or degree, he will never be violent as the
concept of violence is nonexistent. Returning to the “naturally aggressive”
idea, however, if that is true, then the hypothesized boy should in fact be
violent, but as seen, that cannot be possible as the idea of violence has been

Clarifying, the minutiae of the last
example are not what I care about. I am confident that a dedicated person could
disprove my scenario and prove that, miraculously, someone could somehow know
Korean without ever experiencing anything related to Korean culture and
language from birth to death. That is not the point: the point is it is the
raising of the boy (and anyone) that produces behavior. A majority of societies
teach boys to tackle each other, to not cry, to be tough, and conversely, girls
are taught to be clean, neat, obedient, sweet, and so forth. No “natural” order
is involved; “nurture” order is the one involved. These specific teachings per
gender is what creates the seemingly “natural,” but as unveiled, teachings are
not natural but rather social ideas. Even other common “natural” ideas can be
debunked, such as with human sex drive (on this topic, a future review will
discuss sexualizing versus sexual expression). Since this topic is brought up,
I will also use it to explain why naturalism (if that is the term) is false—in
certain cases. With the human sex drive, it itself is absolutely natural. There
is no doubt that sex is a natural desire for women and men, and that this
natural concept includes every sexual orientation and not just heterosexuality.
However, there is a question to be asked: How much of said desire is natural?
That question is what requires deeper analysis.

Desiring sex is natural, but what is
not natural is, for example, excusing heterosexual boys to act as savages who
must have sex and sexualize females or else they would die. Again, certainly
heterosexual boys do desire sex with females as that is scientifically natural,
but the degree of such is simply the desire to have sex. This “natural” desire
should not extend to the point of justifying rape and objectifying females, or
to the point of how heterosexual boys are “naturally incapable” of being just
friends with females. This aspect to the natural human sex drive has been
socially constructed; the idea that heterosexual boys have to sexualize females
or are naturally inclined to see females friends as “more than” are ideas that
have been socialized into boys.

Peering into media unhealthy
portrayal of women (this is what I mean by sexualizing versus sexual
expression; sexual expression is certainly acceptable for both males and
females, but sexualizing is absolutely not, and in media, this is the culprit
behind socializing heterosexual boys to be overly sexually-driven) and what
boys police and say to one another are clear instances of how heterosexual boys
are in fact taught to be overly sexual when, naturally, the human sex desire
should not even be to these extents. Leaving a final point, there is also a
disparity that cannot be overlooked: Why are heterosexual females,
non-heterosexual males and females, or even “feminine” heterosexual males, not
seen as equally sex-driven? If “boys being naturally sex-driven” is true,
especially with non-heterosexual males and heterosexual “feminine” males, this
“natural” concept should indeed affect every single male, but it does not.
Unless if one is a male who follows toxic masculinity (“hegemonic masculinity” is
the proper term and less
; prior to learning this from my amazing sociology
professor, this is what I have been trying to reference in past reviews), then
absurdly, “natural” fails to be applied though “natural” implies all are

Overall, humans are definitely
natural—in certain aspects, that is. It is true that humans have a natural sex
drive, it is also true that humans have sex differences in male and female and
even intersex, and that humans have other biological natural desires, like
eating and thirst. What are not natural are ideas that stem beyond these
biological differences, be it gender (sex and gender are not the same; sex is
biological and gender is social), race, and more. Current perpetuations of
“natural” all serve to normalize what are in fact socially constructed ideas,
such as with “females are naturally nurturing,” or that “boys are naturally
aggressive,” and other examples. Unfortunately, a lot of this “naturalizing” does
in fact serve a negative role. In the case of excusing boys for their acts
because they are boys, male privilege (this is one form of male privilege, as
are other thousands) is supported and is now “naturalized,” even though male
privilege is a socially constructed concept that benefits males over female.
Essentially, sexism is being “naturalized” when one says “boys will be boys” or
“boys are naturally aggressive,” and that is an exceptionally scare-inducing
thought. After all, consider what would be the situation if iKON were a female
group. To say the least, their actions would not be excused as “girls will be
girls,” and sadly, their career would be stunted—all because people have accepted
sexism as “normal,” as “natural.”

In the end, bringing back iKON, in
addition to the general layer of acknowledging their mistakes, it is worth
noting that excusing the men’s acts as “boys being boys,” or any other act and
similar phrase, are not acceptable. Using “boy excuse phrases” merely
perpetuate a false idea of naturalism, and it supports male privilege in that
it excuses boys from acts that they should not be excused from at all. Gender
as natural should, in general, not be assumed; a contradiction already exists
in that idea (“gender as natural” is saying “socialized is natural”). Thus, for
a final takeaway, remember that “natural” is never an excuse for human
behavior, especially in the realm of gender and “race” (though “race” is
socialized and not biologically true, it is still “real” in the sense of being
socially real and in its consequences, hence why I do continue to use the

Digression aside, and perhaps the
longest one I have wrote in a while, in terms of iKON, I do hope they come out
with an apology or an explanation for their prior behavior. Despite that,
however, iKON are all very hardworking and skilled men, and “Airplane” ‘s music
video showcases that. I may need an “Airplane” trip before the review, however.


Score: 6/10

Given how lengthy the digression is,
I do feel that it would have been better to review the song itself and not the
music video as, to confess, I doubt I will write much. My video reviewing
skills are mediocre unless if including a social analysis. I will attempt my
best, and to compensate, I will review the song itself as a bonus. No
explanations will be given, but the numerical values will be for those who are curious
(such as the requester) in a bonus review post.

: Though I
do tend to include a personal summary of how I interpret a music video’s plot,
I will exclude it for this review and onwards. This is to allow readers to
develop personal interpretations without any extraneous influences. Nonetheless,
I will leave a disclaimer of how this rating is still based on a personal take
of the video, and that I do have two main views for this music video’s plot:
the first is related to romance; the second is related to “life,” though that
is horribly said as everything relates to “life.”

Elaborating, the first version is
how romantic feelings disrupt the three close friends’ relationships with each
other. The two men both begin to have romantic feelings toward the woman and
from such, conflict begins to occur between everyone until, ultimately, the
woman decides to fly away and ends the three’s friendship so that no one is
hurt. A better solution
might just be that they all decide to be just friends since males and females
are not “naturally inclined to be more than friends” as discussed, though I am
sure readers have heard enough of this
. The second interpretation is
similar to the first, except that it is not based on romance, but rather, that
the lady has to move away for unknown reasons. One of the men (Bobby) knows of
this while the other (B.I.) does not. This leads to misunderstandings as B.I.
begins to feel jealous towards Bobby, and may even assume that the two have
romantic feelings when, in reality, it is Bobby being additionally kind knowing
that the three will no longer be together as one of them is moving away.

No “right” interpretation exists as
every is valid. My first take is based on the lyrics and interpreting certain
gestures as flirting, and my second take is based on how Bobby appears to be
reflecting and sad, most likely due to knowing their friend was moving away,
and that certain gestures were regular friendly ones and not flirting. No
matter the view, “Airplane” receives a six for its plot.

Focusing on the story, what occurs
is not quite appealing. There are no plot twists or any events that render
striking, but nevertheless, for the plot itself of being about three friends
and their relationship, that does hold as enticing and unique. With the song’s
lyrics, it would be expected that the plot revolves around a couple who are
parting ways, not three close friends that are now splitting for whatever
reasons. Addressing the positives to the plot score, the included details are
praiseworthy: various, subtle, and complex.

For example, the second scene
discloses the closeness of the three friends, but the plot still remains vague—in
a positive manner. The lady, from one perspective, appears to be romantically
interested in Bobby, though he does not reciprocate those feelings. However,
none of what occurs necessarily implies romantic interests; this could all
simply be showing how close the three friends are. Thus, the plot is left open
for various interpretations, and that is always beneficial for increasing a
plot’s appeal. Another scene is also worth scrutinizing. The woman (I do wish
she had a known character name; it feels, for a lack of words, rather rude to
just refer to her as “the woman/lady”) points out to an airplane, but shortly after,
this causes Bobby to dishearteningly look out towards the distance. From here,
the plot still holds as exceptionally complex. Bobby may be reminded of her
inevitable departure, but if that is true, B.I for some reason was not equally informed.
Furthermore, to add onto the confusion of the three’s relationship, B.I and her
seem to share their own sort of secret, and hinted by their “fistbump.”

In the end, with the music video’s
detailed scenes increasing the depth and complexity of “Airplane” ‘s plot, the
rating remains at a six. The plot itself is not inherently appealing, but once
factoring the level of details and how said details are delivered, the plot
scores decently.


Score: 6/10

For the Structural Score, of which
can be considered as the aesthetics to the music video, a six is also given.

Covering the basics, the music video
is alluring in those categories. Multiple backgrounds are used, such as a
rooftop, an airport, or even a bedroom. This, expectedly, helps keep the music
video varied, and thus, enticing as every second discloses a new location.
Adding on, the time of the day also changes. Because of this added aspect,
besides adding in more visual content, this does construct “Airplane” ‘s tone
of being calm and realistic, and similarly, the diverse scenarios also further
complement the video’s overarching tone. “Airplane” in essence is depicting the
normal, casual life of three close friends. Even the alternating of group and
plot does not obstruct that main tone; when iKON in whole arrives, it all still
relates to the notion of airplanes and of serenity. Therefore, for an outcome, “Airplane”
retains high visual appeal, even despite not using active editing or ostentatious
colors. Simplistic is certainly beautiful, and that is what “Airplane”


Score: 6/10
raw score)


Concluding, iKON’s music video of “Airplane”
does score as a six, a slightly above average video. To the requester and
readers, I have also reviewed
“Airplane” as a song
, though no explanations are given. Looking over this music
video review, it can be deemed moreover a discussion on iKON’s bullying
incident than an actual review, but I do hope the bonus review of the song
slightly compensates for the less thorough analysis here.

As always, thank you very much for
reading this review. To the requester, huge apologies for the delays, and also
apologies for not genuinely reviewing the song itself. Due to time, I simply
cannot review both in full, and thus, I do hope the current two reviews are
still satisfying. Also, thank you for the request. I greatly appreciate it.
Since November will be ending in a few days, I doubt I will be able to release
a review in time. Positively, though, many reviews are in store, and with
December being a whole month of no classes, I will be able to catch up on many
songs. GOT7 and Hong Jinyoung are most likely to be the artists reviewed next,
though I may opt to review EXID’s “Hot Pink” as it has been trending (the
ladies deserve it) and would provide an interesting review. Despite whichever
comes first, I am determined to review all of the artists’ latest songs.

Stay tuned for one of those reviews.
I will work hard to return the blog on track “because I don’t wanna let you go
like this.” Keep checking back for, most likely, Hong Jinyoung’s “Cheer Up” or
EXID’s “Hot Pink.”

iKON – “Airplane” Bonus Review

iKON – Airplane (Music Video)

iKON – Airplane

on November 28, 2015


Personal Message:
As the music video review will
discuss (as of this sentence, it is nearly finished; in fact, after posting
this bonus review, I plan to also finish the actual review), to the requester
who did wish for the song review in addition to the music video, I will attempt
to fulfill such. Due to time constraints, I have no time to explain my ratings,
but I nevertheless will leave them for those who are curious. Again, this is a
pure bonus review and is to complement the music video review, of which will be
linked: iKON’s “Airplane” music video review


Song Score: 6/10
(6.0/10 raw score) – “Slightly above average”

Vocals: 5/10

Sections: 5/10
(4.83/10 raw score)

Introduction, Rap,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Rap, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Conclusion (Chorus)    

1.     Introduction:

2.     Rap: 5/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 3/10

4.     Chorus: 5/10

5.     Bridge: 6/10

6.     Conclusion (Chorus): 5/10

Line Distribution: 8/10

Introduction 1, Chorus 1, Chorus 2, Bridge (Total: 4)

Bridge 1, Conclusion 1 (Total: 2)

Pre-Chorus 1, Rap 2, Pre-Chorus 2 (Total: 3)

Rap 1, Pre-Chorus 1, Chorus 1, Pre-Chorus 2 (Total: 3)

Pre-Chorus 1, Pre-Chorus 2 (Total: 2)

Chorus 1, Chorus 2, Conclusion 1 (Total: 3)

Rap 2 (Total: 1)

Equal Value: 2.57 sections per member.  

Instrumental: 6/10

Lyrics: 6/10

Stop for a moment

If we keep this up,
we won’t ever see each other again after
the airplane leaves
“I’ll be good, you be good too”
If you say that and leave, you think I’ll be fine?
Stop pretending to be calm,
there are tears in your eyes
I see a sadness like you’ve lost the world
Stay one more day, unpack
Let’s go watch a movie later,
I’m crying right now, please

La li la di dada la li da
I hate the sky for wrapping around you
La li la di dada la li da
I hate the moon for revealing you
La li la di dada la li da
Because I don’t wanna let you go like this
This is the saddest melody in the world

Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment, it’s raining
The wind is blowing, it’ll be dangerous if you go now
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment, there’s a lot of time
There’s tomorrow too so let her come off
or let me get on
Just one more day, just one more hour,
just one more minute, just wanna say one thing
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment

You left behind a light smile
Left with a smiling face
Pretending to firmly believe in our promise
I should’ve done everything to make you stay
Then I wouldn’t be living in regret, girl
I’m gonna miss your presence for all my life
Just fall into a deep sleep in my arms
I’m looking up at the cruelly beautiful evening sky
Tears are coming ‘cause it’s the last time
I’m seeing you, please

La li la di dada la li da
I hate the sky for wrapping around you
La li la di dada la li da
I hate the moon for revealing you
La li la di dada la li da
Because I don’t wanna let you go like this
This is the saddest melody in the world

Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment, it’s raining
The wind is blowing, it’ll be dangerous if you go now
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment, there’s a lot of time
There’s tomorrow too so let her come off
or let me get on
Just one more day, just one more hour,
just one more minute, just wanna say one thing
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment

Do you have to go today? Can’t you go tomorrow?
I don’t wanna let you go, when will you be back?
I’m scared of getting far away from you
What if we naturally break up? Just one more day,
just one more hour, just one more minute

Stop for a moment, it’s raining
The wind is blowing, it’ll be dangerous if you go now
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment, there’s a lot of time
There’s tomorrow too so let her come off
or let me get on
Just one more day, just one more hour,
just one more minute, just wanna say one thing
Hey Mr. Airplane
Stop for a moment

Choreography Score: X/10

Overall Score: 6/10
(6/10 raw score)




I am dumbfounded; in the music video review of “Airplane,” I admittedly claimed
that iKON’s songs are, at their best, average (five, numerically). Once actual
analysis took place, however, as disclosed, “Airplane” does manage to glean a
six. Personally, their style of music is not preferred, hence perhaps why I did
predict a lower rating. Impartially reviewing the song, though, it led to a
completely different outcome than expected. Overall, for the requester, though no
explanations are given, I do hope this partially satisfies your curiosity
regarding how “Airplane” does rate musically.

Korean Game (ft. MAMAMOO) – “007 Bang” Review and Guide

MAMAMOO – Silent 007 Bang (Video

Korean Game – “(Silent) 007 Bang”

on November 21, 2015


Personal Message:
As said in the prior review, a bonus
post was in mind: a review and guide to the Korean game of “007 Bang.” If
readers are curious as to why I am making this post, MAMAMOO, in addition to being
featured players for this review/guide, did play it in episode 7 of “MMMTV”
(refer to my shamelessly self-advertised video link above; I still, however,
recommend readers watching the entire, official video). Thus, an idea spawned of
how there may be fans that are unfamiliar with the game and would desire an
explanation. After all, MAMAMOO are not the first idols to play this game on
camera; EXO, for example, has also played it, and fans there may also be

Now before beginning, I will leave disclaimers:
Similar to how passed-down stories change in details, my teaching of this game
may vary from others and the “official” version. This is due to how I personally
have learned the game, and thus, will be teaching according to my learned
version. As a result, some rules may be inaccurate, but regardless, the general
idea should hold. Secondly, with the upcoming pictures used to help explain the
game, I will directly apologize (if confused on what is being apologized for,
briefly scroll down and see—and laugh). Writing with a computer mouse is
incredibly difficult, and given that I already have unattractive print writing
in general (and that my main writing style, cursive, is equally questionable),
the pictures appear as if a very young child, one that is still developing her/his
hand-eye coordination, wrote the words. Effort is what matters in this case,
and I very much am proud for my work. Mostly embarrassed, actually.

In terms of the game, though more
will be discussed in the guide itself, “007 Bang” is a fun, prop-less activity
that people of any age can play. Although according to one friend that this
game is meant to be played with drinking alcohol (on a side note, if drinking
games are chosen to be played for whatever reason, do remember to drink
responsibly—during and after the game), it is still an enjoyable and comical
game for casual moments. If chosen to be played as a drinking game, a drink is
taken per received penalty, but as hinted, I do not wish to share “007 Bang” as
a drinking game nor do I actually encourage drinking games at all (but, to each
her/his own; again, be responsible). Addressing the purpose of the game,
depending on how it is set up, it may be used for “elimination,” but generally,
there is no “win” goal; the game is for fun and laughs.

As for why the title is called “007
Bang,” it is in reference to James Bond, the fictional spy agent. Many should
be familiar with this character and his story since it falls along every other
White, male, heterosexual, rich, muscular, apathetic, monotone saving hero
story. I slightly
promise that was in no way passive-aggressive
. Players are, essentially,
spy agents “shooting” at one another while attempting to be stealthy—hence the
title (but, it may be due to other reasons; this is my suspected idea). That
said there are two versions to the game: the silent version and noise version.
Overall, there are no differences between the two versions minus, as the labels
refer to, whether or not noises are made. I will cover both in the guide.

To slightly digress (since I
probably will digress for a while, feel free to read the guide and review now)
on my satirical note of James Bond, I hope no reader feels individually
offended. I am mocking James Bond not in the sense of who he is (or actors who
have played his character), but rather, what he is: the epitome of privilege, moreover
in the context of America (but still very much applicable elsewhere). Due to
various reviews discussing social privileges be it in race, gender,
heterosexual, and so forth, such as Girls’
Generation’s “You Think,”
I will not discuss that in this review.
Reiterating the linked review’s point, however, should there be any reader who
feels disturbed, looking into and acknowledging privilege are the first steps.
For example, while I am disadvantaged in race (in America), I am privileged in
gender, sexual orientation, somewhat in class, and thus, have to realize I am
privileged in those aspects and even many others. Even with, for example, strongly
advocating and discussing gender equity and equality in reviews, because I am a
male, I have to realize that my very being does bring unearned advantages and
that it brings females disadvantages—even if I have done no personal harm, and
in my case, have done positively via attempting to bring in gender equality. It
all does not matter; being a male—being privileged in gender—means having
unearned bonuses in life (refer to reviews that examine cases of what male
privilege can appear as).

Now, this does not mean I bask in
privilege without challenging it. Very much, it is now a social responsibility
to challenge my gender privilege, but the first step is to acknowledge that:
that I am privileged and deserve to be critically analyzed, picked apart, and
in certain cases, even rightfully insulted. Race is perhaps a clearer example.
Being White in America can be conflicting: Whites in the past have done
atrocious, blunt racist acts, but now it appears that Whites in modern time are
taking the blame, even if many Whites are genuinely not racist. That is not the
point. Racism still very much does actively thrive (think of race disparities
in crime, jobs, education, wealth, and think of micro-level incidents of
non-Whites being discriminated against), and thus, White privilege does exist
(in America specifically and perhaps elsewhere; in South Korea, for example, “Korean
privilege” is the case) and that certainly brings unearned advantages, even if
not personally desired. Therefore, though it is hurtful to be insulted for
being White or any other social privilege, rather than retaliating back with actual
oppression (“reverse oppression” is false, as discussed in my horrible writing
of Dal
Shabet’s “B.B.B”)
, understanding should occur. Personally, with being a
male, there have been incidents where I have been attacked for such: “You have
no place to discuss gender equality,” or more broadly of “You’re stupid because
you’re a boy.” In either cases, with being a human and admittedly moreover a sensitive one who cries very
, it does hurt. But, to claim that those sayings are “sexist”
is nowhere near what females experience in the realm of being socially
disadvantaged—in the realm of real sexism. In fact, for other incidents such as
being told not to use makeup or to not even care about makeup since I am a boy,
that idea indeed stems into actual sexism: undervaluing femininity to
masculinity (refer to reviews for this topic).

Overall, returning to the main
point, my mocking of James Bond should be, at the very least, understood;
whether or not that was acceptable is debatable, but unequivocally, it is
justifiable because of James Bond’s possessed social privileges—fictional character
or not. In terms of what I did desire to truly discuss, however, there is a
question I have yet to address that a few readers may have rightfully wondered:
am I excessively critical of everything? Given that this review/guide
significantly digressed over a simple mentioning of James Bond, besides reinforcing my sensitive
 that question is definitely valid.

In answer, I do confess to being
critical of everything, especially with being someone who actively digests
(Korean) pop culture. However, being critical is not an issue, and in fact, the
lack thereof is more problematic than being “overly” critical. Using an
example, if a music video sexualizes females (I plan to soon discuss “sexualizing”
and “sexual/sexual expression” in a future review; the two are oftentimes
mistaken as being the same, and that does lead to huge issues), if I lack a
critical mindset, then that is merely accepting a sexist standard of reducing
down women. It is better to be critical so that that standard is challenged.
Rarely is it possible to be “overly” critical. Homogenous to the terms of “feminazi”
or “social justice warrior,” calling out those who are “overly critical” is to attempt
to downplay their voice and, usually, serious points. With my satirical take
with James Bond, is it truly being excessively critical? Is it not true that
James Bond is the epitome of privilege and that his sheer popularity is
concerning since, from my knowledge, there are very few non-privileged heroes
that are equally as famous?

Concluding, I may be exceptionally
critical at times, as proven by my many digressions in reviews, but it is all
to bring awareness and discussions. What matters is being open to discuss these
subtle yet impactful social topics, and to see from multiple perspectives. I
have no right answer nor does anyone else. I am moreover concerned on the
meaning of an answer, not so much on whether it is “right or wrong.” I care
more on knowing why it is wrong for non-Whites (or non-Koreans; again, based on
the “dominant group” of a place) to be discriminated against on the basis of
race, or why it is wrong that females have to be subjected to males’ objectification
and sexualizing. Conversely, I also care more on knowing why people may argue
that it is justifiable to claim that females and non-heterosexuals are inferior
to males and heterosexuals. I strongly disagree with that, but I do care of that
perspective because I am interested in its meaning—not if it is “right or wrong”

Returning this post to, if possible,
what originally was to be pure fun and laughs, “007 Bang” will be reviewed and explained.
Mentioned earlier, it is a universal game that can be played with young and old
players, while sitting or standing, and no props are necessary (minus at least
three players, though four is recommended for the lowest). MAMAMOO’s example
will be used as a reference point for this review and guide, but I do hope the
following writing is organized and clear enough. All that said, to codename
reader Ms. 007/Mr. 007, a training mission awaits you. We will be looking
forward to your return and
disgusted reaction at the worst transition yet to date.


Recovering from horrendous, corny
lines, truthfully I cannot look at the current pictures without at least
grinning. I am, clearly, not artistic whatsoever. This may explain why friends
are reluctant of me applying makeup for them and that I should preserve personal
eyeliner use for the far future. Jokes aside, “007 Bang” is a straightforward
game. After observing one game and attempting to try it, it should come

To begin the game, a starting player
must be selected. There are no advantages necessarily to being first, so
manually picking or having a rock-paper-scissors battle are fine options. Once
the first player is selected, she/he must draw a square to alert players that
the game has begun, and from there, she/he may “shoot” (point).

In a “round,” four shots is the
limit before a “bang” occurs from the fourth shot (I will explain these
terminologies). A “shot” constitutes as pointing once at either one’s self or
at another player. A player can shoot anyone, including themselves, up to four
times (the fourth shot is the “bang”). There are rules, however. For one, a
player can only “bang” themselves or a player twice consecutively; shooting
anyone with the fourth shot for more than two times will lead to a “penalty.”
For example, Solar points to herself four times—a “bang,” and then does it once
more. She then, however, does it once again. This would be a “penalty” (over
two consecutive same-“bangs”) and thus, she will receive the punishment.
Likewise, if Wheein shoots herself three times and shoots Solar with the fourth
and causes a “bang,” and then afterwards repeats the same method and “bangs”
Solar, but then repeats all that for the third time, she will also get punished
since she same-“banged” a player for more than two times.

Elaborating shooting, shooters are
switched according to whether a player has been shot. A player shooting
himself/herself will be able to carry the next shot (since they were last shot),
but if a player shoots another player, then the player who got shot will be in
control. So, Player A can shoot themselves, for example, two times, and then
shoot Player B. Afterwards, Player A is no longer the shooter, but if Player A
still decided to shoot after shooting Player B (this mistake occurs in MAMAMOO’s
game, as to be explained), they will get punished. Remember: The player who
gets shot is now the shot—the shooter.  


An example of a game in progress
will be used to further explain such (and the game in general). In the picture
above, Solar has shot herself twice via pointing at herself twice. She
initiated the game, and thus, had the first shot. The first shot was used on
her, and as a result, she was still the active shooter since she was still the
last player hit. She then chose to shoot herself again. Now, two shots have
already been fired, and she is in control of the third shot.


A change arrives: she then shoots
Moonbyul with the third shot. The current round now has a total of three shots
fired, and as explained, upon shooting another player, they then become the active
shooter. Thus, Moonbyul is now the armed woman to be feared—and rightfully so
with her possessing the fourth bullet, the “bang.”


Moonbyul now decides to shoot at
Wheein, who is now “banged” because the fourth shot is the “bang” bullet.
Interestingly, however, it is not Wheein that has to be scared; her flankers
are the ones who have to be alert.


Whoever is hit with the “bang”
bullet (the fourth shot/pointing) is not in peril, but the people who are next
to the “banged victim” are. “Flankers,” the players on either side of the
person who gets “banged,” have to both raise their hands up. If one flanker forgets
to or is incredibly slow, they get punished (I will go over the punishment
later). If both flankers forget or are equally slow, they both get punished.
Now, once the game gets intense and very fast-paced, other players may occasionally
make a mistake as well, such as by wrongly raising hands when they are not the
flanker (or by laughing too loudly in the silent version; I will cover this).
In these instances, these mistaken players are punished. Hopefully my beautiful
markings on the picture showcase this.


After a “bang” moment occurs, a new
round takes place. The new shooter is the player who was last shot. In MAMAMOO’s
case, since Moonbyul “banged” Wheein, Wheein is the next shooter up.


Continuing, Wheein decides to shoot
herself once, and then uses the second shot on Solar. Expectedly, Solar is now
the shooter since she was last shot.


Solar decides to shoot herself
twice. In this case, the player “banged” is herself since the fourth shot is on
her, but as explained, it is not the “banged” victim to be concerned, but instead,
those around her/him.


Both Wheein and Moonbyul follow
through with raising their hands since, as seen, they are the “flankers” to
Solar, the person who was “banged.” No punishment has occurred yet for MAMAMOO.


Eventually, though, given the nature
of the game, mistakes do occur. At one point, Moonbyul gets “banged,” and her
flankers, Solar and Hwasa, act accordingly with raising their hands. Jocularly,
though, Wheein also raised her hands when she was not a flanker at all. Thus,
she will receive the “punishment.”


What is the punishment? Whether
standing or sitting, they will have to bend over to reveal their back (in
certain cases, “gentle force” may be required), and from there, every player
can slap his/her back quickly. Again, “gentle force” is used—unless if all the
players happen to be somewhat violent females and males. (In the drinking
version, this may occur, but for sure, a drink/shot will be taken.)

Other common mistakes will also be
covered. Also, to explain the difference between the “silent” and “noise”
version, that is solely it: noise or lack thereof. In the silent version,
pointing is all done without sound, and furthermore, laughing is prohibited and
will lead to the seen punishment. With the “noise” version, every shot must be
accompanied with the numbers of “007” accordingly (first shot is “0”; second
shot is “0”; third shot is “7”). The fourth shot, however, takes the form of “bang,”
hence the game’s title. Additionally, flankers must yell “ah” when raising
their hands. In contrast to the “silent” version, the forgetting of a sound can
lead to punishment.



To now explain the mistakes seen in
the video, at one point Solar points (no pun intended) to Wheein when,
certainly, no one shot her. Therefore, she was not the active shooter, and
shortly after, was punished despite her clever attempt to disguise the mistake.


Later, Moonbyul ends up laughing
amidst shooting. As covered, that is not allowed in the silent version of  “007 Bang.” Her back paid the price.


Lastly, for the mistake that made me
personally guffaw (though the others were equally hilarious), Wheein shoots
Solar not once, but four times. Repeating the rule, once a player is shot,
she/he becomes the wielder of the gun—the shooter. Thus, it is simply
impossible for Wheein to be able to shoot more than once, let alone four times.
A mistake that was well worth it. Not for Wheein’s back, of course.


Review: Assuming
my explanation is not awful, readers should now have a general idea of the
game. Since a review was not the intended goal, I will purely leave minimal
comments. Overall, “007 Bang” is fun and can be very comical, especially once
it becomes very fast-paced and players begin shooting five times, overly shooting
players, or mistakenly raising their hands. Biasedly, I will claim the silent
version is more fun due to the level of stealth and speed, and that it is not
as obnoxious and embarrassing as the noise version, but both are exciting. For
the biggest drawback to the game, though “winning” is certainly never the goal
of these types of friend-games, it does become lackluster and almost pointless
after a while since, simply put, there is no goal. A friend has attempted to
solve that through her version of adding “lives” in that, after three
punishments, a player is out. There is a large issue with that, however, since
the final two players cannot play against each other, and with final three, the
game becomes too easy as there will always be flankers, and thus, players are
ready to raise or not raise hands.


the end, it is a game worth trying and sharing, or at the very least, I do hope
this guide brings an understanding to the game so that when idols play it, less
confusion exists.

this was not a song review, thank you very much for reading. Surprisingly, it
took many hours to write this as I had to create the pictures, but it was a
wonderful change in routine and that readers may very much enjoy this. Expect
iKON’s music video of “Airplane” to be reviewed shortly. To the requester,
apologies for further delays, but it will absolutely be the next review to
finish. Stay tuned for it, and also, for readers, I am glad to see that you,
Ms. 007/Mr. 007, have returned safely [s]only to face more cringe-worthy endings.

CNBlue – “Cinderella” Review

CNBlue – Cinderella (Music Video)

CNBlue – Cinderella

on November 20, 2015


Personal Message:
iKON’s music video of “Airplane” is
currently underway and will soon be out. To the requester, I do apologize for a
slight delay, but it will be finished very soon. This current review is being
written for quick updates and to, admittedly, return the blog to its schedule.
There are many comebacks I desire to review, and with an ambitious mindset, I
plan to cover a majority: EXO’s “Lightsaber,” VIXX’s “Chained Up,” and EXID’s
“Hot Pink” are the songs specifically. Afterwards, I plan on finally finishing
GOT7’s “Just Right,” though at this point, I may instead review their latest
song of “If You Do” and merely transfer the digression that took place (“If You
Do” is a significantly superior song; in fact, it is an impressive song in
general and I will review it instead). On topic, for the updates I wish to
give, I do apologize for a slower rate of reviews despite how, supposedly, the
new outline should encourage multiple reviews. University has been incredibly
busy, and thus, I have had minimal time to write reviews, let alone anything

Five to six hours have been my time
for sleeping (I need seven to be “functional”) due to staying up for homework.
Furthermore, classes are becoming rather rigorous and therefore, I am forced to
adapt via investing more work and time. In short, for the pitiful point, this
is all to say that I have not been neglecting reviews but rather that I have
had no time for reviews. More pitifully, for the little free time possessed—and
for what has helped me survive—watching MAMAMOO videos with my stuffed penguin
has proven to be decent “healing” time. Realistically, of course, friends have
provided stress-relieving with laughs and I am very thankful for them but then again, obviously
MAMAMOO and my penguin are more valuable.
 On a serious note, it is
always crucial to relax. Whether as a student in college or high school, or as
a working adult, emotional and mental health should always be a priority. Be
wary of personal changes in behavior and mood, and equally, in friends and
family. Overly stressing and falling into negative cycles should be avoided and
preemptively noticed.

Before beginning this bonus review,
I will leave a confession: I am partially frustrated at my current writing
quality and skills. Specifically, however, I am moreover upset with my prior
review of TWICE’s “Like Ooh-Ahh.” After quickly skimming over it (as
I shared before, I do not read reviews once I post them), I realized that there
were multiple typos and simply inadequate writing. Though the ratings are
accurate, the explanations behind such could have been improved, and most
pressing, transitions could use significant improvements. But, this all serves
as motivation to work harder so that readers have a better reading experience.
Feedback is also always welcomed, and if I am being overly harsh on myself (it
is good to be critical of one’s self, but not excessively or else it becomes
detrimental versus productive), university stress may be to blame (though rest
assured, I am taking care of my well-being). On an optimistic and fun tone, I
do have a very fun bonus in mind for later: explaining the Korean game of
“(Silent) 007 Bang.”

Abruptly switching over to the song,
for the purpose of time, this review will carry no digression (though for all
the upcoming reviews, each already has their own digression). At most for a tangent,
I will leave quick remarks regarding an unfortunate incident that has occurred
days ago: France’s attack. Admittedly, I lack information on the tragedy, and
thus, cannot deliver any point—though even if I was informed, there is little
to be personally said. I offer condolences for those directly and indirectly
affected. It is all very saddening news to hear. Nevertheless, there are two
ideas to still ponder over: France’s attack received significantly large news
coverage, and that this attack can be seen as a symptom of, arguably, an even
larger threat.

First, though the following words
are in no way to minimalize what France and its citizens experienced, it is
worth noting that other incidents in the past (or even also recently) have
received minor attention. For example, for a common one many have been
pointing, a Kenyan university attack months ago did not receive large coverage
despite how atrocious it was. Race, most likely, has played a role: Whites
receive the spotlight while non-Whites do not. As prior reviews may have
covered, it is always worth being critical and asking who are included and not
included in whatever medium, be it a song, show, story, and so forth. For the
second point and the one I wish to emphasize, for a rather controversial
statement, when it comes to these types of attacks, there is arguably a common,
underlying motive: not accepting others. More provokingly, this is everyone’s
fault; there is no “good” or “bad” side when it comes to these incidents. After
all, using this current event as an example, ironically after the attacks, many
who consider themselves on the “good” side are the ones who leave, for example,
threats to Muslims at schools and in stores. Blatantly, that is not what a
“good” side does. Thus, what matters is not of good and bad, but rather, the
in-between. The up and down.

Again, this is not to claim that
France’s attack or any other similar incident was justified—it is very much
wrong to hurt and kill. But, it is important to not fall into the mindset of
binaries. These horrendous incidents link back to the mentioned notion of not
accepting others. That is what, ultimately, leads to saddening, violent acts.
Whether as large-scale as what France experienced, or as micro-scale as
heterosexual boys harassing homosexual males in schools, the inability to
understand differences is what drives violence. Thus, for a personal message in
regard to France’s attack (despite how I said I had none), I do hope this
further encourages and reminds others to be accepting of one another. Disliking
someone for their race, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion, and so on,
can, and will, lead to violence of some form. Embracing, understanding,
tolerating, and even loving differences are what is necessary if violence is to
be minimalized.

This all also reiterates why my
reviews tend to digress: to discuss these social topics that are seldom
discussed, of which is understandable as it is uncomforting. However, if
understanding is to be obtained, it requires investigating and diving into
disturbing topics, and of course, various perspectives. As disclaimed in the
prior review TWICE’s “Like Ooh-Ahh,” though my reviews may bring up social topics,
that is solely it; I do not offer “correct” solutions, let alone solutions at
all. My reviews merely bring up a topic to ponder over and a personal view—a
view that is one out of infinite views (and likewise musically with my ratings
on songs). Having a critical and open mind is what will help bring positive
changes—changes that happen on the micro level but are nevertheless very
important, such as, for example, not sexually objectifying females because
doing so is contributing to sexism.

Returning to CNBlue’s “Cinderella,”
this will be moreover a bonus review, and therefore, minimal analysis will take
place. As I believe in always being truthful, I do wish to hastily finish this
review so that I may review (mostly explain and share) a fun Korean game of
“(Silent) 007 Bang,” and more importantly, so that I can finish a review
request soon. That said, this review will not be without care; even if more
concise, CNBlue will receive proper respect and “Cinderella” will be
appropriately reviewed. Especially with this song differing in style in
juxtaposition to other songs reviewed (CNBlue is a band versus a traditional
idol dance group), attention and care should not dwindle. The review, however,
will determine if “Cinderella” is truly of royal status or not.


Song Score: 6/10
(5.5/10 raw score) – “Slightly above average”

Vocals: 7/10

Sections: 5/10
(5.43/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Post-Chorus, Verse, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Post-Chorus,
Bridge, Chorus, Conclusion (Post-Chorus)

1.     Introduction:

2.     Verse: 6/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 7/10

4.     Chorus: 5/10

5.     Post-Chorus: 5/10

6.     Bridge: 3/10

7.     Conclusion (Post-Chorus): 5/10

Line Distribution: X/10

name]: X

Equal Value: X sections per member.  

Instrumental: 6/10

Lyrics: 4/10

Hello my baby, I wanna be with you
Day and night, together I wanna see this night end
The scent of your baby lotion lingers in my nose
All of my nerves and senses are alert, my God

When the clock strikes 12,
you disappear like magic
But I can’t let you go today girl
When the clock strikes 12,
turn off your phone
I just wanna be with you

Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Don’t leave me alone, baby drive me crazy (crazy)
Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Without you tonight, I’m a loner baby

Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me

I spread a red carpet for you in front of my house
Walk over here, I’ll treat you like a princess
Don’t worry, I’m different from all the other wolves
I don’t mean anything else, don’t worry, worry

When the clock strikes 12,
you disappear like magic
But I can’t let you go today girl
When the clock strikes 12,
turn off your phone
I just wanna be with you

Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Don’t leave me alone, baby drive me crazy (crazy)
Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Without you tonight, I’m a loner baby

Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me

I’m so curious about the beautiful you
I wanna know you a little more
I’m so dangerous
You that I love,
I wanna feel you all night long
Somebody help me
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me
Somebody help me
(Somebody help me)

Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Turn on the green light, turn on baby ooh ooh
Cinderella, ooh ooh ooh
Without you tonight, I’m a loner baby

Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me-yea yea
Somebody help me, ooh ooh
Somebody help me

Choreography Score: X/10

Overall Score: 6/10
(6/10 raw score)


Analysis: Clarifying
why the Line Distribution is excluded, though both Yonghwa and Jonghyun sing,
with accounting for the group being a band, it would be unfair to grade this
category. Yonghwa is the main vocalist (or at least, based on “Cinderella”) in
the band, and thus, Jonghyun solely provides additional, support vocals. As a result,
if this section were to be graded, it would score exceptionally poorly as
Yonghwa, given by his role, does predominantly sing, but clearly, that would be
unfair as this is a band and not a dance group were, in that scenario, every
member should have an equal amount of sections. Furthermore, the Choreography
Score is excluded since, as explained with the Line Distribution, they are a
band. CNBlue is, expectedly, playing instruments and not dancing, and logically
following that, the Choreography Score has to be exempted.

for the vocals that certainly do exist unlike the prior two categories, the
rating is at a seven. The vocals retain a melodic, smooth sound. During the
verses and pre-choruses especially, the vocals are at their finest: incredibly
tuneful and, for the most alluring factor, the execution of middle and lower
notes are fantastic. With those sections possessing a calm and slower style and
rate, the vocals become greatly complemented and accentuated as the noted
deeper notes no pun
 are further stretched and exposed. Adding on, the singing is
diverse and not stagnant. From passive, deeper singing to segmented bursts of
stronger vocals, “Cinderella” covers a decent range of styles, pitches, and
even pacing. What does prevent a potentially higher score is that the vocals do
languish at the post-choruses. Repetitive, dull vocals do take over during
those sections. Nonetheless, the vocals are very much notable with being varied
and melodic, and the current downside is a minor one. “Cinderella” ’s vocals,
overall, provide a good example of how vocals do not have to possess intense,
powerful vocals to thrive.

terms of sections, many have scored highly minus one. Attention should be
directed toward the song’s unique approach in structure. For example, the
introduction is, so far, the most efficient introduction I have yet to hear. It
is short, musically pleasing, and it perfectly sets up the song’s tone and
transitions the song. Structurally, the introduction is already phenomenal, so
also having an appealing and distinct sound further aids the score. When it comes
to the verses and pre-choruses, though praised earlier, the verse does numerically
score lower than “above average.” Sonically, the two sections contain, debatably,
the song’s best vocals, but structurally with the verse, it does remain plain.
Unlike the pre-choruses that utilize alternating singers to enhance the sound
and to create appeal in their format, the verses are moreover linear. It is of
solely one voice, and though harmonious and pleasing to hear, there is little
deviance in said harmonious voice.

are rated as average, and both components are to be blamed: structure and
sound. The vocals may adopt a more energetic presence, and although that
supports the song in an overarching view via adding variety, for the chorus
sections, the vocals are not the most seducing. Power may be added, but tune is
lost as the singing becomes less dynamic as a result. Homogenously, the
post-choruses experience that as well: repetitive, impacting lines are sung at
the cost of melody. Relating the conclusion, it scores identically with a five
as, lazily and humorously said, it is indeed the post-chorus itself.
Definitely, the conclusion role is fulfilled adequately, but that is it and merely
means a five. If the conclusion was more enticing—the post-choruses, in essence—in
categories of sonic or structure, a higher score would follow suit. Unfortunately,
the rating of the post-chorus naturally follows and affects the conclusion.
Lastly, for the bridge, a dreaded three is in place for “below average.”
Everything of the bridge is to be blamed: the unsuitable structure, or its
relatively obnoxious instrumental that occurs in the later half. If the first
half of the bridge was to be purely kept, then all its current issues may
disappear. After all, the vocals and format are pleasing at the start. It is
the second portion of the bridge that downgrades its quality.

that CNBlue is a band, the instrumental is enjoyable. Bass and guitar sounds are
subtle yet provide a foundation to the song, and furthermore, sound enticing.
Similarly, the beats follow suit—subtle but important. Because of how the
instrumental is conducted, this does greatly work in favor of highlighting
Yonghwa’s and Jonghyun’s vocals. Considering how the men deliver respectable
vocals as well, the instrumental appears perfect. Sadly, it is a six and not,
for example, a seven, for a reason: an instrumental that is entirely a passive,
background one does mean it lacks individually. In combination the instrumental
may flourish, but once judged by itself, it renders are slightly stale. Thus, a
six is its score due to the instrumental lacking its own individual appeal.

discussing the Lyrics category, another low score unluckily appears. Like many
recent reviews, a four appears. Plot-wise, “Cinderella” is based in romance—or lack
thereof. Intriguing details do appear during the first verse and even second
verse, but accounting for every other section, the given details are
lackluster. There are no deeper meanings to the other sections, and the issue
is further enlarged by those said sections being recycled generously. Nothing of
the lyrics strike as special. The main character wishes for their
love-interest, their “Cinderella,” but the lyrics are bereft of any provocative
ideas and details (musically, that is; applying a critical lens may bring up
important social topics). A deeper development of the story has to exist if the
Lyrics score is to be higher. More varying details are needed, overall.


CNBlue’s “Cinderella,” an overall six, or more accurately, with being purely an
audio, the song itself scores a six. Slightly above average can be considered
its rating, and that is still noteworthy. Although technically “Cinderella” may
reside towards the rock genre (though F.T. Island, a labelmate band group, are “more
rock” if this is true), CNBlue is still often encapsulated with K-Pop in
general, and thus, this song can be appreciated for significantly differing,
and more so within the song itself (such as with the introduction). Also,
CNBlue is a band versus dance group, and therefore, more appreciation can be
given for them being unique.

I always say and should practically copy and paste, thank you very much for
reading. No matter if read for a minute or way longer, I appreciate any given
attention toward the review. Upcoming reviews will be all over. iKON’s music video
of “Airplane” will be prioritized, so that can be expected as the next review.
Before it, however, I do have a short “review” (lesson) for a fun Korean game
that readers may enjoy reading about (and perhaps, hopefully, even trying with
friends). It should be a short 30 minute write, hence why I feel motivated to work
on it. After that and the request, GOT7’s “If You Do” will be reviewed, and I
do expect it being a rather praiseful one. And continuing on, after that, VIXX
and EXO will also be reviewed. Many male artists are finally receiving their
deserved spotlight for reviews, and I do hope readers are equally pleased with
that (and that I am thankful for readers pointing out that reviews have lacked
male artists; there is a reason as explained in a Q/A, but I have indeed been
neglecting males—also refer to Dal
Shabet’s “B.B.B”
for how this is not “reverse sexism”). EXID’s “Hot Pink” was also be reviewed, hopefully.

tuned for upcoming reviews. I am still very much busy, but I will continually
work hard for readers. After all, “day and night, together I wanna see this
night end.” Keep checking back for a music video review on iKON’s “Airplane,”
and for a fun lesson on a Korean game.

Thank you for reviewing Twice’s Song “Like Ohh Ahh” and i have to admit i am quite sad that the song did not satisfy you. But, following that, i’m sorry to as i am being greedy with requests but i hope you could review iKon’s “Airplane” , and a analysis of MV would be greatly appreciated! Thx for reading and best wishes!

You’re welcome for the review. Again, also thank you for requesting it in the first place and for being patient. Unfortunately the song did score poorly, but I do expect TWICE to release significantly better songs in the future. As the review covered, “Like Ooh-Ahh” simply sounds too standard to be appealing; the song carries a very stereotypical “pop music” structure and sound, and therefore, is nothing unique. 

As for iKON, I will review “Airplane” next, but specifically the music video. Due to how my review schedule is slightly behind, I doubt I can also fulfill your request of reviewing the song itself. Apologies if that is the case. A music video review should be significantly quicker to finish, and thus, that will help fix the schedule. But, “Airplane,” even if for its music video, will definitely be reviewed (and it is an interesting music video; I have already watched it twice and am still needing to do more analysis). iKON has also been a group I have planned to review at one point. Also, do not worry of being “greedy” with requests; I wholeheartedly appreciate it, and I am certain other readers also equally appreciate it. Requests help guide this blog so that relevant and desirable reviews are written, not ones where there is minimal interest.

As always, thank you very much for the request. I will attempt to finish it in four or so days, but it may be sooner or later depending on my current workload. Look forward to it.

TWICE – “Like Ooh-Ahh” Review

– Like Ooh-Ahh (Dance Practice)

– Like Ooh-Ahh (Music Video)

TWICE – (Like) Ooh-Ahh

on November 12, 2015


Personal Message: Before
beginning, huge thanks and shout-out (this may the first time I have ever used
“shout-out”) to a reader for requesting this review. I have not received many
requests in a while, and admittedly, that is saddening in the sense of not
being exposed to more artists and songs. Also, it is saddening as, recalling
prior reviews, many were guided by requests, and I very much do enjoy that as I
am able to review songs that readers directly desire. But, considering how I
have been horrendous with quickly finishing requests, it is understandable on
why requests may have become unpopular. Nevertheless, I do appreciate every
reader’s voice, whether it is requesting or recommending a song, disagreeing or
agreeing with ratings, or even giving general feedback on the blog and writing.
For a final note before discussing TWICE, there is another rookie group I plan
to review in the future: GFriend. Especially after watching their dance
practice videos for “Glass Bead” and “Me Gustas Tu,” I remain in utter awe at
their adept dancing. The members of GFriend are, to say the least, incredible

the spotlight to TWICE, the group to be reviewed, like GFriend, this group can
also be considered rookies. In fact, they are newer to the K-Pop industry than
GFriend as, if accurate, TWICE debuted around early October due to an audition
reality show that recruited members (readers should correct me if I am wrong)
and have only one title song while, in contrast, GFriend has two. Due to such,
as “Like Ooh-Ahh” is a debut song, I do wish to clarify that if the ratings are
low (I am predicting that to be the case), that should not be equated to the
group’s lack of skills. Improvement is guaranteed for future songs, and it
should be noted that very few debut songs are indeed excellent. A few
exceptions may be MAMAMOO’s “Mr. Ambiguous” or SEVENTEEN’s
“Adore U”
for examples, but regardless, even those groups
certainly can improve—and have improved—and overall, “Mr. Ambiguous” and “Adore
U” are still not utterly outstanding songs even if, for debuts, they are

example is with Girls’ Generation. Though defensiveness may arise, the ladies’
debut song of “Into The New World,” while not repulsive, is far from being a
charming song. But, given years to grow and improve, Girls’ Generation is now
very much respectable and the group has released stellar songs, such as
“Party,” “Lion Heart” and so forth. Leaving a final example and one that may
directly relate to “Like Ooh-Ahh,” Red Velvet comes to mind. With their debut
of “Happiness,” though I did not review the song, I will confidently and
harshly claim that song was mediocre. Very mediocre. However, following the
group to their latest songs, improvement is unequivocally seen. Thus,
connecting TWICE, if “Like Ooh-Ahh” results in a disappointing score, rather
than interpreting such as bashing towards the group’s skills, it should be
understood as a critique to the song itself. They are, after all, in the K-Pop
industry, and thus, do possess the merits that allow them to even be in it in
the first place. Again, improvement is always possible, and of course, even
talented, veteran groups are not immune to releasing poorer songs as there are
moments where, despite the talent, a song may be weakly produced (according to
my review rubric, that is).  

the subject of my review standards, while I strive to keep reviews well
supported with valid arguments, it should be clear that my ratings are entirely
subjective; music, after all, can never be objectively critiqued. At most,
analyzing songs in a mechanical sense with the production (pitches used, etc.)
is possible, but when it comes to deciding what sounds from said production are
deemed “good” or “bad,” that does fall within pure opinions—opinions that are still
backed up by evidence and reasoning, that is. Besides, music is a phenomenon
that cannot be explained scientifically; there is no obvious reason for its
existence or for why it releases dopamine (if a reader disagrees, I would be
interested to hear the science behind music). Therefore, it is not automatically
negative for song reviews to be subjective as not everything can or should be
directly linked to science. Coincidentally, this topic of “humanities versus
sciences” was discussed in an older review of Girls’
Generation’s “Catch Me If You Can.”
Readers who are
interested should refer to it, but in short: both are necessary. Focusing on
solely sciences will cause the loss of humanity—the loss of human connection
and love towards one another. Not having or caring for humanities is to
essentially be a robot. Conversely, caring solely for humanities is to not
physically live; sciences are necessary if physical health is to be improved
and even livable. Sciences allow societies to have technologies that aid in
surviving, or more modernly, to have a more leisure life. Both are needed is
the message.

for a more serious digression (readers should feel free to skip to the review
itself), with discussing the topic of opinions, there is one crucial question I
should have addressed months ago, and especially with becoming a future
educator, it is one worthy of asking myself: Am I trying to force readers to
think in a specific way musically and even socially? Directly answering: no. I
will first discuss the answer in a musical context as that is easier to first
comprehend, and afterwards, I will then include a social context as that is the
more critical piece to ruminate over. With the many digressions reviews have
regarding topics that derive from lyrics, music videos, or regular K-Pop news,
it very much is worth asking if I am attempting to change readers’ opinions on
certain issues.

Musically, reiterating the earlier point, I do
not wish readers to accept my review criteria as “right.” Drawing an obvious
example, my outline should not be rendered as the default method for
deconstructing a song. There is an infinite amount of ways to break apart a
song—my method happens to be one view out of the infinite. Referring to other
song reviewers, whether of K-Pop or not, truly discloses such. Furthermore,
even within the outline, the way in which I dissect a song’s lyrics, sections,
vocals, and so on, vastly differs from others. It is solely one perspective.
For example, I tend to grade “intense” vocals (tuneful singing, note holds,
note stretches, etc.; think of Ailee) more highly, but clearly, that is a
biased take on what constitutes as excellent vocals. There are certainly songs,
such as with raps, where vocal intensity is minimal to nonexistent, and yet, it
would unfair to judge a rap’s vocals as average because of such. Nonetheless,
even with attempting to be flexible with criteria, it is all based on a
personal perspective. What is classified as a solid chorus or instrumental
certainly does differ from another person’s view, and no one is ever “right” in
regard to music quality.

a final point, rather than hoping that readers blindly accept my reviews as
“correct,” I merely hope to provide new insight towards songs. That is the
ultimate purpose of my reviews: giving new perspectives. Now, this does not
permit lousy and horrible arguments for reviews; it instead means that reviews
are personal, supported interpretations of a song. Likewise, social topic
digressions follow suit: I hope my positions on certain social topics are
supported by decent reasons, but in the end, those stances are still all
relative to my view—a single view. I may, and probably do, have stances that
are very controversial, even if there are valid reasons. CLC’s
’s digression is a perfect example. My stance
regarding shaving is somewhat extreme, but nevertheless, it is supported with
evidence and is not an abstract, pathetic idea. However, as noted, it is still
a peculiar view, and thus, rather than forcing that stance onto readers, I
simply hope I have given a new perspective. After all, with the shaving
example, I very much do hope readers disagree with my position; my personal
stance with shaving admittedly does not support equality and equity—it is
one-sided take.

I do not ever wish to force my ideas upon readers (and future students) as
correct. For what I do expect, however, is that through sharing my
perspectives, readers develop their own opinions and become critical with what
is believed in. Using the shaving example once more, many do in fact disagree
and that is what I desire: not forcing readers to accept my views, but forcing
readers to critically think over my views and over their own views—musically
and socially. No matter a view and how much it may be disliked, being able to
respect the perspective and to critically think over it is vital and of main
importance. Whether my views are agreed or disagreed with is irrelevant; what
matters is asking why my views are agreed or disagreed with, and why my views
are as they are.

that said, the review will now officially begin. TWICE is a newly debuted
group, and with their first song of “Like Ooh-Ahh,” this review will determine
if the song does cause listeners to go “ooh-ahh.”


Song Score: 4/10
(4.2/10 raw score) – “Slightly below average”

Vocals: 4/10

Sections: 4/10
(4.43/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Rap, Verse, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Bridge, Chorus, Conclusion

1.     Introduction:

2.     Verse: 4/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 5/10

4.     Chorus: 5/10

5.     Rap: 4/10

6.     Bridge: 3/10

7.     Conclusion:  5/10

Line Distribution: 3/10

Nayeon: Verse 1, Chorus 1, Chorus 2
(Total: 2)

Jeongyeon: Chorus 3 (Total: 1)

Momo: Verse 1, Verse 2 (Total: 2)

Sana: Verse 1, Verse 2 (Total: 2)

Jihyo: Verse 1, Pre-Chorus 1, Chorus
1, Pre-Chorus 2, Chorus 2, Chorus 3 (Total: 6)

Mina: Verse 1, Pre-Chorus 1 (Total:

Dahyun: Rap 1 (Total: 1)

Chaeyoung: Rap 1 (Total: 1)

Tzuyu: Pre-Chorus 1, Pre-Chorus 2
(Total: 2)

All: Bridge 1, Conclusion

Value: 2.11 sections per member.

Instrumental: 4/10

Lyrics: 5/10

People can’t leave me alone for a single minute
I’m so pretty,
I make everyone smitten
No matter where I go, the floors are red
Like walking down a red carpet,
everyone is staring at me
Some people ask “Who’s your mama?”
They take a fresh approach,
but I don’t feel a thing
But I wanna fall in love with someone
Wanna fall in love baby
Listen up my boy

I’m waiting for someone who can make me feel
something like never before
(That’s who I’m waiting for)
I’ll wait, no matter how long it takes
I just wanna fall in love

What to do, keep me still
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Fake, fake, empty-hearted fake
Goodbye, good riddance huh (Like ooh-ahh)
What to do, make me speechless
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Bla-la-la-la stop talking, start doing
Make me feel huh (Like ooh-ahh)

Look at me and see me again
Pass by once and look back (Twice)
Wherever I go, I go without makeup
And I still shine the most
Flat shoes can’t hide my high value

Movie like scenes run through my head la-la-la
Just thinking about it
makes me excited yeah
Now I want to love somebody
Wanna fall in love baby
Listen up my boy

I’m waiting for someone who can make me feel
Something like never before
(That’s who I’m waiting for)
I’ll wait, no matter how long it takes
I just wanna fall in love

What to do, keep me still
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Fake, fake, empty-hearted fake
Goodbye, good riddance huh (Like ooh-ahh)
What to do, make me speechless
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Bla-la-la-la stop talking, start doing
Make me feel huh (Like ooh-ahh)

Don’t wanna start with just anybody
I’m not a girl who gives it up so easily
Let me see how you gon’ treat me
I ain’t no “easy”
Better think about it twice
Let me see how you gon’ treat me
I ain’t no “easy”
Better think about it twice

What to do, keep me still
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Fake, fake, empty-hearted fake
Goodbye, good riddance huh (Like ooh-ahh)
What to do, make me speechless
Make me like ooh-ahh ooh-ahh
Bla-la-la-la stop talking, start doing
Make me feel huh (Like ooh-ahh)

Like ooh-ahh

Choreography Score: 7/10

Overall Score: 6/10
(5.5/10 raw score)


Analysis: For
a fun fact, as of this sentence, it is nearly two in the morning. The phrase,
“the things I do for-readers-and-to-keep-my-review-schedule-on-track-without-losing-valuable-homework-time”
certainly applies here. And perhaps a loss of composure. Jokes aside, this may
be the lowest scored song yet. The Song Score does average out at a four, and
though disappointing, it is understandable on why that is the case.

Line Distribution rates at a three for below average, and that is because of a
significant disparity: Jihyo has six sections while three other members are in
need of one additional section. Should Jihyo have lost three sections, a rating
of nine would have been granted. But with the current share, four out of nine
members being unequal in quantity will significantly decrease the score along
with how, based on Jihyo’s count, a large gaping disparity exists.

also on the non-musical side of the Lyrics category, a five is in place. “Like
Ooh-Ahh” contains lyrics that are, as the rating, average. Many sections repeat
similar ideas if not identical ones, and additionally, for the repeated lyrics,
many are dull in detail. For example, the choruses and pre-choruses contain
lyrics that are not alluring as the lines are composed of very simplistic,
short phrases. Worse, however, is the repetition as every chorus and pre-chorus
recycles the same mundane lyrics. Even with the overarching plot, it fails to shift
away from the traditional theme of romance—though it is not inherently negative
for lyrics to reuse that theme. What is negative for “Like Ooh-Ahh” is how
within its theme, it is an incredibly plain story. It can, after all, be
summarized in one line: a confident lady is looking for a love-interest that
will make her go “ooh-ahh.” Optimistically, for why the score is at least a
five versus a lower score, it is unique in the sense of using “ooh-ahh” as its
key idea. Similar to MAMAMOO’s
“Um Oh Ah Yeah”
(on a side note, I love that song), exclamations
are used to describe the main character’s feeling, though for “Like Ooh-Ahh”
specifically, it is used moreover to describe her desire. Also, for the
sections that are not of the choruses, pre-choruses, and bridge, those sections
are indeed appealing and deliver great detail to the plot’s main character.

over to the musical side of the song, coincidentally the Vocals, Sections, and
Instrumental category all hold at a four. (Also, as of this sentence, happy
Pepero Day for those who celebrate it.) Beginning with the vocals, immaturity
is an encapsulating description—not in the sense of physical sounds, that is; TWICE,
based on “Like Ooh-Ahh,” significantly lacks vocal control. While true that the
vocals are diverse in notes, style, and that at the end there is a short note
hold, the execution of it all is not alluring. For example, the choruses do
possess many desirable qualities, such as the ones mentioned earlier regarding
note diversity and all, but despite those traits, the produced sounds are not
enticing. There is minimal complexity and the vocals sound mundane and overly
basic. Likewise, the instrumental falls in a similar situation in that, though
complementing to the vocals and helpful for progressing the song, it sounds
incredibly plain. Overall, if both the vocals and instrumental utilized sounds
and styles that were more distinct and not of stereotypical “pop” music, higher
ratings may be earned. As of now, the lack of specialty will be negative for
the song. Obviously the genre of pop is not inherently bad (no genre is), but
when very basic pop music sounds, such as in “Like Ooh-Ahh,” is indeed
produced, it is difficult to receive anything higher than a five. There is
simply minimal creativity, and in such a “popular” genre where many songs are
created, being distinct is vital—both for publicity but also in that better
quality does, usually, mean shifting away from using basic pop sounds in
instrumental, vocals, and so forth.

to the sections of the song, as the prior paragraph explains, a four is in
place as TWICE’s song strictly follows stereotypical pop music. Although
personal guilt is felt for the following excess harshness (again, refer to the
Personal Message for how this review is not to humiliate the hardworking
ladies): only the bridge will be specifically inspected as the rest can be
generally critiqued. With the remaining sections in mind, regardless of whether
a four or five is specifically granted, the general idea holds: average. The
introduction is unique in style, but with the given instrumental, it renders
plain; the verses, pre-choruses, and choruses all follow a traditional format,
and thus, lack appeal in structure—let alone how sonically they all also lack;
the rapping is poor in categories of flow, melody, and pacing; and lastly, the
conclusion, though fulfilling to its role as it is a recycle of the
introduction and therefore pacifying, fails to be mesmerizing as explained for
the introduction itself. Finally addressing the bridge, a three is given for
below average. The bridge follows, as the other sections, a standardized
structure and therefore, is already unappealing in that regard. Most impairing,
however, is the second half of the bridge where minimal sonic appeal worsens to
nearly nonexistent: obnoxious vocals take over. Now “obnoxious” is admittedly
exaggerated; the vocals are not to the point of utter chaos, but nonetheless,
are very low in quality. Chanting is moreover the accurate term, but even so,
it does not erase the fact of how it is structurally unsuitable and sonically
unattractive. A three is given as an outcome, though a two would have been the
case if it were not for the first half.

the choreography and in
promise that I am not being overly strict because of university stress
, thankfully,
a higher rating appears: a seven. “Like Ooh-Ahh” may languish in its musical
value, but the dance holds. Syncing, though not excessively precise, is still
quite accurate and noteworthy. Beats, for example, are connected with, and more
generally, the song’s overall pacing is flawlessly reflected. More intense moments
consist of quicker movements, and conversely, more passive moments showcase
equally calm syncing. In terms of key points, this is the dance’s strongest
point. Especially with the benefit of having nine members, many formations are
possible. Delightfully, TWICE does manipulate that attribute as every section,
minus the choruses, uses a new key point. No verses are identical, each
pre-chorus varies, and so on. Accounting that both syncing and key points are in
higher standards, a seven is rightfully earned.


gauging the song from its Overall Score, a rounded-up six is the rating, but if
peering at the musical component, it does suffer with a four. Optimistically,
for a debut it is a respectable start. Given the time and practice, TWICE will definitely
blossom, and thus, I will return to the group in a few months. Nevertheless, in
juxtaposition to many other songs, “Like Ooh-Ahh” is partially lacking.  

the requester, apologies for this review being delayed. University work has
become hefty, but I have finally finished. Thank you for requesting the song,
and to other readers, thank you for reading this review. I greatly appreciate
any time invested in the blog and messages from readers. Since the blog is two
weeks behind schedule, I do have plans to redress such. Already exposing my
plans: EXO, VIXX, GOT7, and CNBlue will all be reviewed, and both groups of EXO
and VIXX have had very recent comebacks. Sadly, however, an expiring review of
F.T. Island’s “Severely” may be put to rest as I currently feel like speaking emotionally and
as it is simply too late to return to. But, with the
digression that occurred, I will transfer it over to the next review as the
digression topic is extremely important for readers to ponder over. And, on the
topic of digression, with the next reviews being of solely male groups, I do
hope more artist variety is gleaned and that readers are satisfied. (Refer to
horrible writings of Dal
Shabet’s “B.B.B”
and a Q/A
that discusses why there is a disparity of female and male groups reviewed; in
short, challenging male privilege and personal implicit biases are the reasons—though
the latter I am very much disarming. If I recall, I wrote defensively in the
Q/A when I should have been humble and confessing my bias, and thus, I do
apologize for that.)

As this is the end, I hope readers can “wait, no
matter how long it takes” for the next review because “I’m waiting for someone
who can make me feel something like never before”—and it perfectly happens that
readers are that “someone.” Cringing end aside, stay tuned for, most likely,
VIXX’s “Chained Up” or finishing GOT7’s “Just Right.” One of the reviews will
be finished, but most definitely, November will end with at least all the
reviews mentioned above.

Hello once again! Been reading the blog silently these days and finally decided to put in a request. I hope that you would take your time to review the rookie group “Twice” song “Like ooh ahh”. Thank you!

Hello, I hope you are doing well. On topic, I will certainly review that song. GOT7′s “Just Right” will be set aside temporarily so that TWICE’s “Like Ooh-Ahh” is reviewed as soon as possible. Thank you so much for the request. Regarding the song, I have started listening to it for a bit. Considering TWICE has very recently debuted, I am not too surprised that, admittedly, “Like Ooh-Ahh” is not too captivating. But, for a start, it is nothing negligible and it will be an interesting review. What would be desirable is to review the group in the future to see how they have matured. 

Of course, however, I have not officially started the review, and thus, whether the song scores incredibly well or poorly is unknown. Concluding, once again thank you for the request. I will attempt to publish the review around the weekend. 

Monsta X – “Hero” Review

Monsta X – Hero (Dance Practice Halloween

X – Hero (Dance Practice)

Monsta X – Hero

on October 31, 2015

Personal Message: Truthfully, ZE:A’s “Ghost of the
Wind” was to be reviewed, but a change of plans occurred. Nevertheless, this
works out favorably: Halloween is directly related, and this review will be on
a relatively newer group and song (the group and song came out around September
if accurate). Most likely this will be a bonus review akin to the prior one, but I may decide to write it as a
standard review after all (in other words, more analysis will be given). If the
latter does occur, however, I will still be keeping it relatively concise so
that my piling list of homework shrinks, and of course, it is Halloween so I
wish to keep the review lighthearted. On that note, happy Halloween for those
who celebrate it, and for those who do not, hopefully this day is as fabulous
as previous days.

In truth, though, I expect readers
who celebrate Halloween to, at most, give out candy rather than
trick-or-treating themselves, and thus, there may not be a large “celebration”
after all. But, everyone is certainly free to do as they wish, such as
trick-or-treating despite being rather older. That said, I do anticipate many
readers being that of an age group of high school to college, but younger and
older readers are certainly welcomed. I hope my reviews do reach out to
everyone regardless of age, race, gender, and so forth. The sole restrictive barrier
may be that younger readers may struggle to comprehend and conceptualize
certain concepts I discuss, both musically and socially, but I very much do
hope I reach a variety of readers from all over.

Focusing back on the review, as it
is Halloween and I do wish to keep this review cheerful, I will tell a horror
story: I have actually never gone trick-or-treating in my 18 years of living.
Insert horror movie scream here. While my family has celebrated Halloween in
the context of giving out candy for school (during elementary), in terms of
trick-or-treating or giving out candy at home, neither were ever done. Many are
horrified at this “experience,” but this is merely a difference in culture,
and, as I always urge, it is about respecting differences. I very much still
consider myself an “American” despite not having ever celebrated Halloween (and
more so with discussing sensitive topics of race, gender, and so on), and that
I still had a “normal” and good childhood—even if it did not involve gorging
myself with Halloween treats.

Now for an actual story, especially
with Monsta X’s Halloween dance practice showcasing spider plushies all over (I
partially promise I am not using “plushy” to reduce fear), for a lack of a
better phrase, I did become slightly creeped out. If I had never shared yet
with readers, I do admit I have a fear of spiders. However, I would like to
believe my fear is justified and that, overall, I still do appreciate spiders.
Expanding on the latter, I appreciate spiders not quite because of their
purpose in the environment and keeping insects’ population in control (after
all, those obviously cannot be good reasons), but rather because a spider
allowed me to realize a hidden talent: amazing singing vocals—as a child that
is. Allow that to sink in. Though in my current time I am far from musically
talented and nowhere near possess ZE:A’s Kevin’s charming voice, as a child I
was hitting notes that MAMAMOO’s Solar hits (on a side note, she is amazing and
I aspire to be like her): incredibly high pitched and powerful note holds. It
just so happens I needed the encouragement from a spider to discover that. In
short, for what did occur as a four year old child, my mother failed to wash
away a spider that was in the bathtub. Therefore, when I was being bathed, I
had eye contact and saw in vivid detail a medium-sized brown spider on my knee.
Needless to say, I unleashed the mentioned inner Solar vocals I had.

Bad story aside, reflecting over my
theology professor’s incredibly jocular story of his “horror” Halloween
adventure, perhaps my spider incident is not worthy of justifying my current
fear of spiders after all, and that missing out on Halloween is not necessarily
unfortunate (and that I feel very grateful for having amazing professors, and
for having had an amazing professor and teachers). Transitioning to a more
serious topic (readers should skip to the review by now unless if interested),
with mentioning “theology,” readers may now become curious of multiple
subjects: the type of university I attend, or more generally, my thoughts on

Blatantly with K-Pop, it is seldom
for religion to be introduced unless if it is AOA’s Jimin praying in hopes that her cable ride would
not break during the show of “One Fine Day,”
and thus, I will take
advantage of this opportunity to discuss a rare, sensitive topic that is
exceptionally important—similar to how race, gender, sexual orientation, class,
and more should be discussed. First, with taking theology class, from my
understanding, it is true that religion cannot be taught in public schools
unless if in a secular context. For example, the teaching of the history and
facts behind religion is allowed versus, for example, teaching religious ideas,
such as with how the Catholic God wants people to side with those who are
excluded (such as by siding with homosexuals; if there are readers who wish to
discuss this idea of whether homosexuality is a “sin,” I am open to explain
this stance of how the Catholic God does, in fact, embrace homosexuality—more
will be explained later).

On topic, because it is a theology
class and thus, is related to the teachings of religion directly, this does
showcase that I am attending a private university. As my review of GOT7’s “Just
Right” will explain in the lens of beauty, I do acknowledge being privileged in
class (I am able to afford being fashionable, for example). Even with
scholarships, my family being middle-classed greatly increases my chance of
being able to attend a private university (though I have been in public schools
my whole life prior to recently). Therefore, likewise with being privileged in
gender and sexual orientation (male and heterosexual) and other categories,
even if minoritized in race, I openly acknowledge the unfair privileges that I
do have and wish to share these personal facts with readers.

Continuing, for those curious at my
religious affiliation, I have shifted all over: I was raised with Buddhism, but
then transitioned to atheism, and then later, switched to being agnostic.
However, for what I consider myself now, it is a surprising, unusual stance: agnostic,
Buddhist, and Catholic. All simultaneously. This should sound as entirely
ridiculous and that I am confused and fail to understand what religion is as
all three cannot co-exist—especially with being agnostic as that would
contradict also being Catholic and Buddhist.

Defending this absurd position, I
will first explain the background that has influenced me to now adopt my supposedly
“wrong” affiliations. As stated and to intimately share, I used to be an
atheist—the one that was misguided with what atheism was. I used to be very
firm in the idea that no divine beings existed, and that if anyone did believe
in such, they were merely silly. Atheism may be the perspective that no divine
beings exist, but the latter idea is not a part of it; being an atheist does
not mean bashing and degrading religious affiliations that do indeed worship
divine beings—it solely means not believing in said divine beings. I was
limited in view and failed to respect differences. If this stance was applied to
other lenses, the damages I brought are further accentuated: my bashing of
other religious affiliations was like bashing females, non-Asians/non-Whites
(depending on which group is the “dominant” race; refer to other reviews for
this concept), non-heterosexuals, and so forth. Thankfully, as I became
educated in the common areas of race, gender, and class during senior year of
high school, I expanded on such via also looking at religion (and other
categories). In the end, a replayed message is seen: respecting and attempting
to understand different views and opinions.

As a result, for the ultimate point,
with finally learning to embrace differences and to love said differences, I
adopted my current three religious affiliations as I find myself believing in
all three. I am agnostic because there are instances where I neither deny nor
believe of a divine being, such as perhaps with scientific ideas. Homogenously,
though, I still believe in the Catholic God existing and guiding those who
follow Her/Him/It (and notice, another interpretation; rather than just Him, my
view involves Her and It) to be allies with those who are minoritized for
whatever reason (be it race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, etc.).
Lastly, Buddhism is also believed in as I find it important to connect with
everything around so that kindness and understanding are gleaned—to others and
one’s own self.

Overall, it is not “wrong” to be an
atheist or agnostic, nor is it wrong to be a Muslim or Christian. What is
wrong, however, is when differences are not tolerated—when different religious
affiliations, genders, races, classes, and so on, are not equally respected. With
religion, no religious affiliation is superior or more “right” than another,
and furthermore, for the interpretations within a religious affiliation, every
view also has to be accepted and understood. Returning to the earlier point of
how I stated the Catholic God wishes for privileged people to reside with those
who are excluded so that everyone can be within Her/His/It’s embrace, I also
have to hear from the perspective that states that the Catholic God does find
certain groups of people as “sinful” and deserving to be outside of “kinship.”

It is all about treating and seeing
everything with equal respect, even when it can be enraging to do so, such as
with hearing out the perspective that females are inherently inferior to males.
This all does not mean to be passive (I will passionately disagree with the
prior example as I believe both females and males are equally worthy), but it
does mean that rather than entirely ignoring various, disagreeable
perspectives, genuine discussion and thinking should take place so that
understanding is met.

Discussions of religion aside, of
which I do hope readers find interesting and thought-provoking (also, I do
apologize if any reader feels uncomfortable with me bringing in religious
examples; this is for the purpose of context, not to “force” readers to believe
in certain stances and religions), Monsta X will finally be of spotlight.
Biasedly, I do adore “Hero” and am glad the seven men of Monsta X released a
Halloween special since if it were not for that, I would not have heard this
song. With such, though I personally enjoy the song, this review will,
obviously, be impartial and solely of systematic grading.

In terms of Monsta X, I have watched
their first appearance on the variety show of “Weekly Idol” when their senior
label group, Sistar, accompanied them (and AOA with N.Flying and Secret with
Sonamoo). While they did elicit laughter, in honesty, I did not find them
distinctive (nor N.Flying and Sonamoo; the episode, while comical, did not
personally lure me into the newer groups). Optimistically, with this song,
Monsta X has finally caught my attention. Whether with their prettiness (refer
to Teen Top’s “Ah Ah” for a discussion of homophobia;
there is no problem with me, a heterosexual boy, complimenting the men’s
beauty), their powerful and swift dancing, or their admirable vocals, Monsta X
has much potential considering they are new in the K-Pop industry.

Before finally beginning the actual
review (at this point, every reader should just read the review now and then
return here later), there is one minor note to make: the lyrics to “Hero,” once
critically analyzed, are slightly questionable. Infinite’s “The Chaser” possess similar lyrics, and thus, I
will simply refer to it, but in short, the lyrics do—most likely
unintentionally—objectify females in a sense. The problem is not that females
should not be “protected” by males or that females should not want to be
“protected”—this is all up to a female’s decision—but the problem is that
females are equated to trophies. The idea of “protecting” is not inherently bad
if it includes the idea that both males and females can “protect” (physically
and emotionally) and that both males and females can be protectors (there are,
after all, many songs where the lyrics are of a lady protecting her lovely
boy), the issue is where the protecting stems from and how it varies per gender:
for females, objectification; that women are trophies to be hoarded, won, and

When a male is being “protected,” it
is usually out of general love and other romantic-related ideas and seldom due
to “owning the boy.” Conversely, when a female is being “protected,” the same
word suddenly connotes a new meaning: it is protection because a “man” has to
do such; it is because a man “must possess her as his”; it is because “others
will claim her.” Definitely, there is the rebuttal that “protecting” is
necessary as males desire to “claim” women and that “protecting” repels those
unwanted acts, but if no boy in the first place decided to objectify females,
and thus, no “claiming” ever took place, the need for protecting will also fade
away. The Lyrics category may not be affected in score whatsoever due to
social-level analysis, but it is still very much worthy to be critical of what
songs perpetuate. In “Hero” ‘s case, though seemingly romantic, the lyrics are
merely recycling an arguably misleading idea of what love is for females.
Monsta X are certainly not to blame as they are solely performers, but the song
producer (or lyrics composer) is worthy of questioning. More largely, society
in general is worthy of critiquing as the song producer may have simply got
her/his idea from asking, “What do females consider romantic?” And that answer
has been unfairly established.

Definitely beginning the review, in
addition to how I urge readers to be critical and open for differences, I now
have also displayed the result of what stress due to overworking leads to excessively digressing.
I will be more organized in future reviews, but I always do hope my words
provide new insights. After
all, how often do you hear an 18 year old boy claiming he is Catholic,
Buddhist, and agnostic—without him being drunk
. Pitiful jokes aside,
this review will determine if “Hero” will receive horrific ratings or not.


Song Score: 6/10
(6.4/10 raw score) – “Slightly above average”

Vocals: 7/10

Sections: 6/10
(6.14/10 raw score)

Introduction, Verse,
Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Rap, Verse, Pre-Chorus, Chorus, Rap, Bridge, Conclusion

1.     Introduction:

2.     Verse: 6/10

3.     Pre-Chorus: 8/10

4.     Chorus: 5/10

5.     Rap: 6/10

6.     Bridge: 6/10

7.     Conclusion (Chorus): 6/10

Line Distribution: 9/10

Verse 1, Verse 2 (Total: 2)

Verse 1 (Total: 1)

Verse 1 (Total: 1)

Pre-Chorus 1, Pre-Chorus 2 (Total: 2)

Verse 1, Verse 2 (Total: 2)

Rap 2 (Total: 1)

Rap 1 (Total: 1)

Choruses, Conclusion (Chorus)  

Instrumental: 6/10

Lyrics: 4/10

Y’all know what it is
Monsta, Monsta
Monsta X is a pitch(?) right here
(What, what, what, what)
Look at me, let’s go

As I watched over you all day
I discovered just one problem, yeah
All those fake, wolf-like guys
who keep bothering you
No, you’re mine
I have the duty to protect you
I’ll protect you
so no one can ever take you easily

You’re so beautiful that I have many enemies
It’s like playing a game to protect the princess
Don’t worry, I’m your man, I can be your hero

I can be your hero
I can be your hero
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man

I can be your hero, all villains get back
I’ll wrap up all the bad guys
and put them in the next truck
Every single one of them look like a beast,
throw ‘em away at the zoo
They’re just all talk,
spitting out nonsense to have you
(What?) If you thought I was easy,
eat a mushroom and grow bigger
Put on underwear over your pants and put on a cape
Sometimes wear a suit,
shine a light from your chest, we shine
Everyone bow your head

This is my last warning
When I get mad, I change scarily
I’ll protect you
so no one can ever take you easily

You’re so beautiful that I have many enemies
It’s like playing a game to protect the princess
Don’t worry, I’m your man, I can be your hero

I can be your hero
I can be your hero
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man

I’ll take out all your villains
like bang bang bang bang
I’ll fly around
in the sky like Superman
I’m gonna hang on the edge of your lips
and make you smile like Batman
I’ll tell all the villains
who make you cry to go away

I can be your hero
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man
I can be your hero, I can be your man

– Choreography Score: 8/10

Overall Score: 7/10
(7/10 raw score)


Analysis: Beginning
with the Lyrics category since it appears that I am being hypocritical with
scoring, to be direct: the lower rating is not because of the earlier tangent
involving the lyrics. Also to note, I am uncertain on the introduction’s word
of “pitch”; admittedly I do hear “b****,” but since I am in doubt, I will leave
it as “pitch” to be safe. Regardless, again, social analysis will not influence
the score if it does turn out to be “b****” (also I would prefer to not censor
the word as it is being used maturely and academically, but I will do so that
every reader is comfortable). On topic, to explain the lyrics’ lower rating,
the ideas are highly basic, and worsening the situation, those ideas become
reiterated often. For example, besides the transparent example of how the
chorus endlessly recycles “I can be your hero, I can be your man,” a line that
is overly used and plain, other sections include the pre-choruses. If more
depth were to be added to the lyrics, and if less repetition occurred of using
exact lines, then perhaps the rating would be higher. However, with the current
lyrics, the plot is too simplistic and the given details fail to bring any
unique points.

the vocals, Monsta X’s singing for “Hero” can be considered above average.
Vocals may not be extensive and strenuous such as with superb note control, note
stretches and note holds, but all of the singing definitely remain melodic. Whether
it is the raps, verses, or even the straightforward choruses, and most certainly
the pre-choruses, all of “Hero” contains vocals that are alluring, diverse, and
powerful. No point in the song showcases vocals that are bereft of tune or of
an absurd, unwelcomed singing style. Relating the instrumental, a six is in place.
When it comes to meshing with the vocals, the instrumental perfectly blends
and, additionally, augments the vocals in that power and rhythm are now added
to the vocals’ flow. This is flawlessly seen in how the pre-choruses are
conducted, of which will be explained later. Explaining why the instrumental
score is not to a higher tier, the choruses are to blame. Excluding that
section, the instrumental is catchy, powerful, melodic, and it provides “Hero” ‘s
soothing, deeper frequencies, but once the choruses’ instrumental piece is
factored in, it does become slightly chaotic and mundane. Nevertheless, it is overall
an impressive EDM instrumental (if that is accurate).

running through the Line Distribution, miraculously despite a few members
having exactly one section, the lines are all evenly split. Although Monsta X comes
very close to a ten, as discussed in my prior review of f(x), unless if every
member has the exact number of sections, the highest possible is a nine.
Nonetheless, a nine is fantastic and will greatly aid the Song Score.

the sections, many are rated at a six. Overall, the main, consistent reason for
those sixes is: those sections fall short due to lacking an aspect of some kind.
Nearly all of the sixes sections nearly meet a seven rating. Using an example,
the introduction delivers charisma and power, and additionally, seamlessly initiates
the song, but the introduced instrumental lacks in a sonic context, hence the
decreased score. Furthermore, in opposite, the verses are attractive sonically
due to the excellent vocals, but structurally the verses carry no distinctive
form. The conclusion is also identical with the verses: solid singing and a
proper closure, but nothing else proves special. Predictably, the rap and
bridge follow suit in lacking a minor yet important detail. Specifically, the
raps could be more enticing with delivery, especially through being more cohesive
as the current pacings’ and stressing points’ fluctuations are hectic, and for
the bridge, while the unique structure is appreciated, it does fail to be
infatuating in sound as it does rely upon the instrumental, of which is not the
strongest by itself.

at the choruses, I did foresee a significantly lower score due to the
instrumental, but with the added vocals, the choruses are saved. Combining both
the choruses’ lines and the prominent, dynamic instrumental that occurs, while
both are mediocre individually, in cooperation both allow the choruses to
thrive as the section becomes a powerful, rhythmic and contrasting point for “Hero.”
Every other section is melody-oriented, and thus, with the choruses differing, variety
is extracted for the song in whole, and also, the contrast creates emphasis for
both parts: melodic sections are seemingly more so, and the choruses are
seemingly more powerful and beat-based. Ending on an exceptionally promising section,
the pre-choruses reap a high score of an eight. Why this is the case was hinted
at earlier: perfect synergy with instrumental and vocals. First, the
pre-choruses adopt a traditional form in that a lighter tone is adopted, and
that beats accelerate in rate. Though such is normally despised as it lacks
originality, “Hero” manages to execute it. The main driving force behind the
success is Kihyun’s singing. Upon the pre-choruses taking place, Kihyun’s
singing follows the trend of becoming higher pitched and gentler, but
simultaneously, his vocals equally picks up in intensity and melody as the
section continues. Thus, for an outcome, the pre-choruses become a perfect mix
of vocals and instrumental working with one another. Organized, lively and
tuneful, and very much unique.

ending the review with the choreography, an eight is earned for the dance’s
score. Arrogantly (and cheesily) said, the dance speaks for itself. Both main
categories of the choreography are exceled at, whether it is the key points or
syncing. “Hero” ‘s key points remain varied, as noticed by how every section type
includes its own exclusive dance point. Even if repeats within a section type
(pre-chorus, chorus, etc.) occur, due to how complex and detailed each dance
set is, appeal remains in place. Syncing is also stunning as every single
maneuver reflects back to the song’s audio. There are no points in which any
movement is off-sync. Now, shifting away from a robotic analysis, in an
overarching view, the dance is truly phenomenal. It is powerful and fun, and
with the choreography disclosing movements of all kinds and speed, anything
less than an eight for a score would be misleading. The dance is a flashy,
seducing dance that perfectly showcases Monsta X’s skills and ability to match
with song.


Monsta X’s song of “Hero” finishes out with an overall seven, of which
indicates it is an above average song. Musically, it does hold as slightly
above average, but the weaker lyrics are at fault. Sonically—pure sonically with
solely sound—the song is impressive, though to confess, still repetitive at
times. Regarding Monsta X, with the seven gentlemen being classified as rookies
yet showcasing stellar singing and dancing, I hold high anticipation for future

you very much for reading, and for many readers, this review may come as
surprising: it is released right after the last one. Seven hours of grinding
writing will be of credit. Unfortunately, I did brush aside homework for the
purpose of finishing this on time for Halloween, but positively, if I was able
to write for a total of seven hours in one day, I can do the same with homework.
On point, thank you very much for reading any bit of this review.

is arriving, and I do have a few reviews in mind already. Reflecting over this
current review outline, I greatly appreciate what it brings. Reviews are more
concise, and most strikingly, are now even more fun to write. At times in the
past, reviews did feel laborious, but due to this shorter format, I feel that I
am able to get to the main points of a song without feeling bored. Also, I
managed to reach my goal of five reviews—though, of course, I did “cheat” with
having two shorter reviews. Nevertheless, this creates more potential of the
number of songs I am now able to review within a month. Once again, thank you
for reading, and for the upcoming review of November, GOT7’s “Just Right” can
be expected. While “I can be your hero,” and “I can be your man,” I will
clarify that the two phrases translate as: I will continue writing reviews as a
“reviewer hero,” and that my “being a man” is simply continuing to love fashion
and makeup, and to speak out against social inequalities and inequities—since doing
those things is, in fact, masculine. Stay tuned and keep checking back.