nkotb
Joined: August 15, 2001 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 6500
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:33 PM UTC
#
Seriously Hoya, who are you…Rhett?!?! :D
I KID!
Originally posted by Mobius:
how can you say the article is right on if you weren't there?
Rhett Miller
Joined: November 15, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 17762
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:33 PM UTC
#
That all may be true, but I think the Post write did a better job of explaining why the show sucked than anybody on here did of explaining why is was "fan-fucking-tastic". I guess that's why he's getting paid to write his review and we're wasting our work time writing about it on this board.
Originally posted by Mobius:
Few, if any, people here said it was the best show evah. And the Post article seems just as bad as it is biased in the opposite direction. I think you like the article b/c it summed up what you hoped the show would be when you justified not going.
skeeter
Joined: May 29, 2003 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 4011
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:40 PM UTC
#
Maybe - just maybe - they did the whole political rally thing because they thought it might be kind of fun. And if it was for publicity..well…good for them. It was their big cd-release party. What's wrong with a little marketing on the day of your first cd release in many years? Especially if everyone involved gets to have a little fun. Jeez - Lighten up people.
It wasn't the greatest show of all time. It was far from the worst. It was definitely a really fun time.
walkonby
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:48 PM UTC
#
since i myself am one, i feel the pumpkins fan base should be called the army of drama queens, following the leadership skills of the head practitioner himself.
Rhett Miller
Joined: November 15, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 17762
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:53 PM UTC
#
I wasn't criticizing their marketing techniques (though it all reads rather corny to me personally), rather I was criticising the disingenuous of saying how the whole show was one big gift to the fans.
Originally posted by Bombay Chutney:
Maybe - just maybe - they did the whole political rally thing because they thought it might be kind of fun. And if it was for publicity..well…good for them. It was their big cd-release party. What's wrong with a little marketing on the day of your first cd release in many years? Especially if everyone involved gets to have a little fun. Jeez - Lighten up people.
It wasn't the greatest show of all time. It was far from the worst. It was definitely a really fun time.
Shadrach
Joined: Unknown
Posts: 0
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 06:58 PM UTC
#
That write up definitely made me question how The Post, or any other publication, decides who to send out to do the reviews for what shows. Clearly you couldn't send an uber fan because in their eyes the band could do no wrong. That said I would think you should at the very least send someone who has some level of appreciation for the band they are reviewing. When reading that write up is was pretty clear that the writer had some negative preconceived notions about the band, their music and Billy Corgan himself. So why did he bother coming? Just to confirm his distaste for The Pumpkins? Makes no sense to me.
This paragraph in his article clearly spells out that he already has a serious dislike for Smashing Pumpkins: "The inclusion of a six-song mini-set of acoustic material was as inevitable as it was intolerable. Corgan's nasal wail is tough enough to take when it's accompanied by massive guitars and thundering drums – and that's on record, with the assistance of studio trickery. In a live setting, with nothing but an acoustic guitar to accompany his voice and embarrassing lyrics ("This is the song I've been singing my whole life / I've been waiting like a knife / To cut open your heart / And bleed my soul to you" – there are so, so many more where that came from), it was borderline torturous. Ten more minutes and I would have confessed to war crimes."
ggw
Joined: December 16, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 14237
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:01 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Shadrach:
"Ten more minutes and I would have confessed to war crimes."
That was a great line.
I thought he should have coined a fancy sub-genre name with it:
Noriega-Rock
Psych-ops-Rock
Rhett Miller
Joined: November 15, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 17762
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:06 PM UTC
#
But can't you have a level of appreciation for a band AND have negative preconceived notions about the band?
I appreciate the mark Led Zeppelin left on the music world. And I appreciate the fact that they're better than many bands that followed their trail.
Yet, I fucking hate Led Zeppelin and Robert Plant's annoying wail of a voice and his whole squeeze the juice from my lemon legs schtick. You couldn't pay me enough to see them live, either now, or five years after their last show.
Originally posted by Shadrach:
That write up definitely made me question how The Post, or any other publication, decides who to send out to do the reviews for what shows. Clearly you couldn't send an uber fan because in their eyes the band could do no wrong. That said I would think you should at the very least send someone who has some level of appreciation for the band they are reviewing. When reading that write up is was pretty clear that the writer had some negative preconceived notions about the band, their music and Billy Corgan himself. So why did he bother coming? Just to confirm his distaste for The Pumpkins? Makes no sense to me.
This paragraph in his article clearly spells out that he already has a serious dislike for Smashing Pumpkins: "The inclusion of a six-song mini-set of acoustic material was as inevitable as it was intolerable. Corgan's nasal wail is tough enough to take when it's accompanied by massive guitars and thundering drums – and that's on record, with the assistance of studio trickery. In a live setting, with nothing but an acoustic guitar to accompany his voice and embarrassing lyrics ("This is the song I've been singing my whole life / I've been waiting like a knife / To cut open your heart / And bleed my soul to you" – there are so, so many more where that came from), it was borderline torturous. Ten more minutes and I would have confessed to war crimes."
Brian_Walalce
Joined: May 16, 2005 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 1484
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:12 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
…complaining about an arena band…
Arena? Really? In 2007? Slow down. Let's wait until first week sales come in for "Zeitgeist." Let's not get ahead of ourselves. I'm sure 1997-era Smashing Pumpkins was a thrilling experience in an arena (you know back when they had the blonde on bass and the guiarist who…) but ten years on…?
Actually, I just came up with a great idea. Why don't the Smashing Pumpkings and Marilyn Manson headline an arena tour together! They both have new albums out!
And they could set it up like dueling political conventions. Corgan vs. Manson. Each with their own set and their own "delegates." Flags, placards, buttons. CSNBC could cover it…
HoyaSaxa03
Joined: March 22, 2004 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 7053
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:14 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Mobius:
I think you like the article b/c it summed up what you hoped the show would be when you justified not going.
i justified not going to the show because i don't really like much that billy corgan (excuse me, the smashing pumpkins) has created in the last 12 years or so
i liked the article because it was well-written, snarky, immensely funny, and an antidote to the recent flood of fawning posts
Originally posted by Mobius:
I'm not saying any opinion isn't ok or right, and others agree with you (and the Post) but how can you say the article is right on if you weren't there? It didn't reflect what I experience or what any of the people I was with experienced.
you're putting words in my mouth … i never said the concert review was "right on", just that i enjoyed it … i did say a little while ago that STE's fantastic defenestration of 'zeitgeist' was "right on," but that's because i've (unfortunately) listened to the album
the whole setup of the concert was created for die-hard fans, which is totally and utterly cool (honestly, i'm not shitting on you for liking the pumpkins) and which is why the washpost review didn't jibe with your fellow concert-goers
i was just happy to hear about the concert from someone who had even the slightest possibility of objectivity after spending a week reading this board, that's all.
HoyaSaxa03
Joined: March 22, 2004 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 7053
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:16 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by ggwâ?¢:
Originally posted by Shadrach:
"Ten more minutes and I would have confessed to war crimes."
That was a great line.
agreed, i actually snorted a little in my office … quite embarrassing
sweetcell
Joined: July 18, 2006 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 22608
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:16 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
I appreciate the mark Led Zeppelin left on the music world. And I appreciate the fact that they're better than many bands that followed their trail.
Yet, I fucking hate Led Zeppelin and Robert Plant's annoying wail of a voice and his whole squeeze the juice from my lemon legs schtick. You couldn't pay me enough to see them live, either now, or five years after their last show.
the point being, then, that you should not be sent to review a zep reunion show (if you were a concert reviewer). you're going to walk in resenting having to go, and will walk out hating the band even more - no matter how good a performance they put on. you might as well write your review before you even set foot in the venue… not unlike this malitz hipster-dude. it's predictable and unimaginative.
Rhett Miller
Joined: November 15, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 17762
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:22 PM UTC
#
Not necessarily. If a band is indeed great, they could change my mind. There are a number of bands I once hated who eventually won me over; My Morning Jacket is one of them.
Originally posted by sweetcell:
Originally posted by Charlie Nakatestes,Japanese Golfer:
I appreciate the mark Led Zeppelin left on the music world. And I appreciate the fact that they're better than many bands that followed their trail.
Yet, I fucking hate Led Zeppelin and Robert Plant's annoying wail of a voice and his whole squeeze the juice from my lemon legs schtick. You couldn't pay me enough to see them live, either now, or five years after their last show.
the point being, then, that you should not be sent to review a zep reunion show (if you were a concert reviewer). you're going to walk in resenting having to go, and will walk out hating the band even more - no matter how good a performance they put on. you might as well write your review before you even set foot in the venue… not unlike this malitz hipster-dude. it's predictable and unimaginative.
HoyaSaxa03
Joined: March 22, 2004 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 7053
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:22 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by sweetcell:
you might as well write your review before you even set foot in the venue… not unlike this malitz hipster-dude. it's predictable and unimaginative.
see, i disagree … i read the review a second time and it seems to come not really from the perspective of a hater, but rather a disinterested observer being plopped down in the middle of a spectacle put on for die-hard fanboys (and i don't mean that pejoratively)
it's obvious that this show (or any of the residencies) wasn't for the "general public", but it was interesting to hear a John Q. Public's take on seeing all this bombast going on around him
sweetcell
Joined: July 18, 2006 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 22608
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:27 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Hoya Paranoia:
i was just happy to hear about the concert from someone who had even the slightest possibility of objectivity after spending a week reading this board, that's all.
hoya, i appreciate your desire to read some non-fanboy reviews (we have been a tad rabid around here). but personally, i'm not convinced that this person is a good source, he seems more like an anti-fanboy (or someone looking to score points with other hispters by slagging off The Big Guy). this man seemed to have an agenda as obvious as any rabid fan's. again, my opinion… if the review worked for you, great, but i'm not sure that a truly un-opinionated attendee walked out as unimpressed as this guy was.
Originally posted by Shadrach:
Absolutely, but you probably shouldn't be doing write-ups about that band. You wouldn't send the food critic who hates Asian cuisine to review the hot new Chinese restaurant in town, would you?
or a vegetarian to review the new steakhouse.
nkotb
Joined: August 15, 2001 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 6500
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:32 PM UTC
#
Can we come up with board definition for "hipster"? People are deemed hipsters when they don't a band everyone else likes, and conversely when they like a band that everyone on here dislikes. I'm never sure which side of the coin I'm on.
Originally posted by sweetcell:
but personally, i'm not convinced that this person is a good source, he seems more like an anti-fanboy (or someone looking to score points with other hispters by slagging off The Big Guy).
sweetcell
Joined: July 18, 2006 at 05:01 AM UTC
Posts: 22608
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:37 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by nkotb:
Can we come up with board definition for "hipster"? People are deemed hipsters when they don't a band everyone else likes, and conversely when they like a band that everyone on here dislikes. I'm never sure which side of the coin I'm on.
<img src="
http://members.optusnet.com.au/alphawolfau/Funny_shit/Thread_hijack_live.jpg" alt=" - " />
Rhett Miller
Joined: November 15, 2001 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 17762
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 07:37 PM UTC
#
If you use the word "hipster", you're more than likely one yourself.
Originally posted by nkotb:
Can we come up with board definition for "hipster"? People are deemed hipsters when they don't a band everyone else likes, and conversely when they like a band that everyone on here dislikes. I'm never sure which side of the coin I'm on.
Originally posted by sweetcell:
but personally, i'm not convinced that this person is a good source, he seems more like an anti-fanboy (or someone looking to score points with other hispters by slagging off The Big Guy).
Mobius
Joined: March 28, 2002 at 06:01 AM UTC
Posts: 1371
Re: so was the pumpkin show THAT bad... ??
July 12, 2007 at 08:25 PM UTC
#
Originally posted by Hoya Paranoia:
Originally posted by Mobius:
[qb]
i liked the article because it was well-written, snarky, immensely funny, and an antidote to the recent flood of fawning posts
the whole setup of the concert was created for die-hard fans, which is totally and utterly cool (honestly, i'm not shitting on you for liking the pumpkins) and which is why the washpost review didn't jibe with your fellow concert-goers
i was just happy to hear about the concert from someone who had even the slightest possibility of objectivity after spending a week reading this board, that's all.
Ok, I respect that. But I completely disagree that the Post review was objective. The conclusions were broad and lazy, relying on assumptions about Billy Corgan and the reformed SP. I agree with what Shadrach said and will also point out that the the guy trashes the entire acoustic set relying on a quote from one song and not much else. What about the acoustic versions of Rocket and 33, at the least. They were great. The 'war crimes' line was 'funny' but it was snark for the sake of snark. If you thought 33 was a war crime, your opinion doesn't mean much on this subject - although you may be entertaining on some level.
But I also though Mr. Walalce was out of line saying the Beatles are the worst band ever.
