Paddy
Member
*Pick up a P..P...P.. Paddy*
Best newcomer 2009
Posts: 19,336
|
Post by Paddy on Jul 23, 2009 19:20:25 GMT 1
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8165450.stmBlur's summer concerts could be the end of the band as there are no plans for them to get back into the studio. Despite the rumours, bassist Alex James said they have not talked about "doing anything else whatsoever". Over the summer, Blur played a series of concerts including ones at London's Hyde Park and Glastonbury Festival. "That was what we said we'd do and we did it and it was great. It hasn't been mentioned the idea of doing anything else but hey, it was great," he said. 'Best gig we've ever done' James said the band were surprised by the reaction they received from audiences, saying it was "too much" for them to cope with. "I've spent the last week staring at a bonfire muttering to myself. I haven't been able to contain the joy that it brought to all of us. It was very, very emotional. Everything we hoped it would be and more." He said playing Glastonbury was a punt as it was "kind of like doing an away gig, you're not playing to your own crowd". "The weather was perfect, the crowd were up for it, we were up for it and between us we smashed it to bits. "What was amazing was the band's and the audiences' connection. Best gig we've ever done. Amazing." This was the rumour at Hyde Park that we had seen the last gig Blur had done in London ever. I think it is correct, they have a huge back catalouge and a band need to start the trend again of not coming back, we've had so many old bands reform.
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Jul 23, 2009 19:29:26 GMT 1
Grrrr! Why does a band need to "start the trend of not coming back"?! They've already come back! Surely by that suggestion, they shouldn't have reformed at all!
|
|
Paddy
Member
*Pick up a P..P...P.. Paddy*
Best newcomer 2009
Posts: 19,336
|
Post by Paddy on Jul 23, 2009 20:48:23 GMT 1
No, they come back to do special gigs, love that, but no point making new material, can ruin a reputation.
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Jul 23, 2009 20:55:39 GMT 1
But equally, could be sensational! It's not like they've demoed some awful stuff and people are annoyed. Damon has done some fantastic stuff as Gorillaz, The Good, the Bad and the Queen, and his world music projects. Graham too has done some brill stuff.
|
|
|
Post by suedehead on Jul 23, 2009 21:46:22 GMT 1
The live comeback has been a triumph. It could have gone horribly wrong but it went extraordinarily well. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean any new material would be as good as their old material. The last thing I'd want to see is them making a mediocre comeback album.
|
|
|
Post by Razzle Dazzle on Jul 24, 2009 10:59:58 GMT 1
everyone knows gigging is what makes indie bands money these days, their albums always chart high then fade away whilst pop and r&b stick around for months selling a constant amount of copies. the point is they are milking the fans and in return offer no new material. i have much more respect for bands that comeback for the music, even if they sell a few thousand copies and make a few thousand people happy that is what it should be about. the two creative members of blur have put out brilliant music for the past 5 year so there is no reason a new blur album would be anything but great. the only thing stopping them is themself. they can't be arsed with the hasssle of making an album when they can sell out 40k stadiums and make more money from one gig than an album
|
|
Al
Member
Posts: 12,575
|
Post by Al on Jul 24, 2009 11:00:53 GMT 1
I dislike Alex James. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Razzle Dazzle on Jul 29, 2009 23:11:35 GMT 1
he is a bit of a bellend
|
|
|
Post by Razzle Dazzle on Jul 29, 2009 23:15:21 GMT 1
alex james... alex zane... zane lowe...billy zane
seems anyone with alex or zane in their name is a bit off a tosser
|
|
Paddy
Member
*Pick up a P..P...P.. Paddy*
Best newcomer 2009
Posts: 19,336
|
Post by Paddy on Jul 30, 2009 16:47:16 GMT 1
I like Zane Lowe.
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Jul 30, 2009 22:18:10 GMT 1
I notice Graham is up for a new album according to NME.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jul 30, 2009 22:25:01 GMT 1
I dislike Blur. Oasis were 10 times better.
|
|
|
Post by Maximo Mark on Aug 2, 2009 11:38:10 GMT 1
Oasis pale in comparison to Blur. Oasis made two good albums, Blur made 6. Blur evolved with every album and each song of theirs comes from a clear era, whereas anything Oasis have released in the last 10 years could be from any album they've released in that period any song Blur made you're likely to guess the album right as no two albums they made sound particularly similar!
It would be a shame if they didn't record, but at least they've settled their differences and had a career highlight in doing so!
|
|
|
Post by Razzle Dazzle on Aug 2, 2009 18:12:51 GMT 1
he plays good tunes but the guy is a tit
|
|
space
Member
Posts: 3,739
|
Post by space on Aug 4, 2009 22:30:48 GMT 1
so it was all about money...midclass students...blah
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Aug 5, 2009 22:44:36 GMT 1
What made you come to that conclusion?!
How many bands out there AREN'T doing it for the money anyhew?
|
|
Paddy
Member
*Pick up a P..P...P.. Paddy*
Best newcomer 2009
Posts: 19,336
|
Post by Paddy on Aug 6, 2009 16:20:14 GMT 1
Takes a long think............................................
......................
.........................
.............................
No, sorry Sim, can't think of any.
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Aug 6, 2009 21:20:42 GMT 1
I guess U2 don't really need to do it for the money any more. Or Coldplay maybe. Although it depends on their outgoings. Saving the Third World can't be a cheap thing although they always seem to want ME to give my money...
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Aug 8, 2009 22:51:58 GMT 1
They ALL do it for money to some extent. Ask any big band, Stones, U2, Coldplay, to do a year's worldwide tour for free, no earnings at all for them. What would their answer be?
|
|
|
Post by S1m on Aug 8, 2009 23:04:17 GMT 1
"Is it for charity but on t.v.?"
|
|