I'm in love with The Lovemarks
Sometimes I find myself asking: Why is it that Huckapoo never took off? At all. (I have here in my hand a 2004 Christmas EP with the mocking coverline, "Look for the new Huckapoo CD to be released in January 2005"). Do not suggest to me that the answer lies in the quality of their music. I will not hear of that.
Marketing errors may have had something to do with it. Perhaps they should have spent less time blowing Disney execs (I'm refering only to manager Brian Lukow, of course, not the girls — that would be wrong) and not enough time cultivating a freaking MySpace presence. Hello, 2006 calling! Or perhaps Lukow didn't have the clout he thought he did. I mean, he was basically pitching the Huckapoo version of High School Musical three years ago, and if he can't sell it now, when everyone is looking for the next High School Musical, he's in the wrong business.
My new theory is the counterintuitive one: Huckapoo was not heavily manufactured enough. Which is why, without hearing song one, I'm betting all the chips on The Lovemarks, which is the name Cure for Bedbugs has given to a forthcoming band to be created by advertising agency Saatchi & Saatchi. Per the trad rags,
Marketers will be able to hire the as-yet-unnamed group to promote their brands in their songs, their clothing and what they eat and drink...The girls all hold down day jobs and are being groomed into pop stars with singing and choreography training and styling. It is estimated that the agency might have to send over £200,000 a year to develop the band.
The girl group will make its public debut next month in a "mobisoap" -- a series of minute-long soap opera-style films reflecting their real lives relayed via mobile phones.
My only reservation: the girls' stage names are not up to Huckapoo snuff: Mercedes, Chanel, S-Jay and Rockwell. What is this, 1990?
In the meantime: Is Natasha the next Shakira...?
Comments
In response to the question, "Why is it that Huckapoo never took off?" I'm gonna go out on a limb here and agree with the author of the blog entry that first alerted me to the existence of Huckapoo: The reason probably is... that the band's name is "Huckapoo."
Crazy, I know. But I'm sticking with it.
Posted by: Vance | April 14, 2006 12:24 PM
Bands with worse names than Huckapoo who have/recently had Top 40 success:
Hoobastank, Nickelback, Linkin Park, James Blunt, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Arctic Monkeys, Ne-Yo, etc.
Lukow probably should have pushed even harder for Disney coverage. Fellatio is barely first base in Disneyland these days.
Posted by: Dave | April 15, 2006 11:10 PM
Dave -
Of the names you've cited, only "Hoobastank" is anywhere near the level of "Huckapoo." And here are two reasons why that particular analogy fails:
1. Huckapoo is not composed of four guys who look like this.
2. Hoobastank has an advantage to getting onto the top 40 charts:
They're not called "Huckapoo."
Posted by: Vance | April 17, 2006 1:05 PM