Trying to get excited about Foos

[BlackZeppelin]

They seem like a band I should really like. They have all the right elements for me being a big guitar sound fan, love massive drums...but something seems missing with the Foos

Are they awesome live? Or do they play their studio stuff differently on the big stage....cos as much as I try to get into them, they just sound hackneyed and unoriginal. 

I love Grohl on the drums but his guitar playing seems pedestrian and all the songs I've been listening to seem pretty much the same.

So, while not meaning to offend hardcore Foo fans, I just want a few insights into my Saturday night entertainment - are they worth investing that prime spot to?

 

[JayBalls]

They're are good live, Daves guitar playing is questionable but that's what Shiflett and Smear are for.

[Heather90]

This is how I feel about Radiohead. If there ends up being someone else I really like on elsewhere I'll go to that instead.

If nothing catches my eye and friends are watching  I'll give it a shot and wander over to the cabaret area or Williams green and find something else if it's not my thing. 

A friend of a friend I've never met before told me at weekend that I won't like them as I'm a girl. Also he stopped going to Glastonbury when it became over commercialised in late 80s. There is apparently noone worth seeing these days- despite said comment about radiohead

[Hugh Jass]

I'm not sure there is such a thing as a "hardcore Foos fan".

[henry bear]

His mother?

Edited May 16, 2017 by henry bear

[Icewulf]

They are awesome live. I've seen them twice at MK Bowl, and they absolutely smashed it in my opinion. They have so much energy on stage, and the first time I saw them they played for 3.5 hours with a 15 song encore. They also pull huge guests. At the first MK Bowl gig Roger Taylor and Alice Cooper joined them, and I've seen them play with Tenacious D on stage in the past, etc. Definitely one to come along and give a go.

[CaledonianGonzo]

It's the only way you'll get to see the hologram of Krist Novoselic.

[windy_miller]

Why are there two threads for this?

[Hugh Jass]

3 minutes ago, windy_miller said:

Why are there two threads for this?

One for people who are excited and one for people who aren't.

[Homer]

4 minutes ago, windy_miller said:

Why are there two threads for this?

That's how hard he's trying! You can't fault the effort.

[Hotchilidog]

I'm looking forward to them. As one of the few people who have yet to see them I am expecting a good old fashioned rock out and sing-a-long. Ironically it s the Foos vanilla-ness that makes them a great saturday nigh headliner. They have loads of hit records, catchy tunes and simple choruses. In Dave Grohl they have a man who seems to really understand and 'get' the festival. This is not just another gig for them and as such shold be a cracking show.

[JayBalls]

1 minute ago, Hotchilidog said:

I'm looking forward to them. As one of the few people who have yet to see them I am expecting a good old fashioned rock out and sing-a-long. 

You won't be disappointed 

[FloorFiller]

Haven't seen them live in ten years and I was a much much bigger fan back then, but as far as Glastonbury headline sets go I think they'll give it a real good go, although probably not one for the ages.

As a former big fan I'm sure I'll find a lot of stuff to enjoy in their set (especially with it being almost guaranteed to be an all out greatest hits set) but if you're not already a fan of their music then I doubt it's gonna be for you - it's all about giant sing alongs and 'whooaa's and crowd response. 

[priest17]

I was really excited about them at this point, it's all worn off a bit now. Still makes me smile seeing the post when the dude got in

 

 

[COPG]

Foo Fighters will either go one way or the other, I'm judging it  on their time slot.

Two and a half hours: Massive gaps between the big ones and I'll soon lose interest
Ninety  minutes: If they do a "best of" set it would be epic  

[Wilfko]

3 minutes ago, COPG said:

Foo Fighters will either go one way or the other, I'm judging it  on their time slot.

Two and a half hours: Massive gaps between the big ones and I'll soon lose interest
Ninety  minutes: If they do a "best of" set it would be epic  

This.. I like the Foos (by no means love), but a 2 1/2hr set would be too much at Glasto, I don't want to be In the same spot for that long! 

Already looks like I may be stuck at pyramid all Friday which is mildly annoying if the George Ezra, Royal Blood, The XX, Radiohead order is true.

[FloorFiller]

1 minute ago, COPG said:

Foo Fighters will either go one way or the other, I'm judging it  on their time slot.

Two and a half hours: Massive gaps between the big ones and I'll soon lose interest
Ninety  minutes: If they do a "best of" set it would be epic  

They're almost definitely gonna be playing for at least 2 and a half hours I'd have thought - it's pretty much the norm for them and what with Dave's little '3 hour' comment I can't see them doing any less than that. What you consider 'the big ones' may differ to others though - they're gonna play a few album tracks, sure, but I can't imagine you'll ever be two or three songs away from a huge hit, 'cause they have a lot of them. Playing some shows before Glastonbury which will be a good (if not identical) indicator of what they'll play.

[Wilfko]

Also as mentioned a few times on this forum, normal Everlong please Dave, put the acoustic away I beg you.

[COPG]

2 minutes ago, FloorFiller said:

They're almost definitely gonna be playing for at least 2 and a half hours I'd have thought - it's pretty much the norm for them and what with Dave's little '3 hour' comment I can't see them doing any less than that. What you consider 'the big ones' may differ to others though - they're gonna play a few album tracks, sure, but I can't imagine you'll ever be two or three songs away from a huge hit, 'cause they have a lot of them. Playing some shows before Glastonbury which will be a good (if not identical) indicator of what they'll play.

I suspect you're right ,but that does mean missing a sub and a headliner somewhere else and no casual fans enjoy a 3 hour set of a band they're not that into.

 

[simian_mobile_mushrooms]

Foos seem a bit of a strange one really. I agree, I should like them too, given the genre. I like Royal Blood, I like QOTSA, I like RHCPs and the like, but Foos........ they're just so samey, their songs imo go at one speed. Sure they've got some exceptions but on the whole I guess I find them quite boring. Maybe as a result of nice guy Grohl's influence on their 'nice' rock? Depending on who else is on, I'll prob catch the start of their set just for a half hour/45 mins then see the Jacksons. Come with us if you like

[ironmike8]

If they do their cover of Band on the Run I'll be there in a flash

[mjsell]

Knock Grohl all you like, and I do like, but he does give it his all. I do genuinely think they will be a very good headliner. I won't be there having seen them before at MK bowl, and with so many other options available I'd feel like I was wasting those other options. But if you havent seen them before, are in the mood for you're classic guitar based, singalong ,high energy act then there arent many better.

2 hours is the most they should get though. They can pull off longer sets, but generally Grohl will just fill it with ramblings after claiming that he hasnt got time to chat because they "are just going to play as many songs a possible"

[Robinn]

33 minutes ago, COPG said:

Foo Fighters will either go one way or the other, I'm judging it  on their time slot.

Two and a half hours: Massive gaps between the big ones and I'll soon lose interest
Ninety  minutes: If they do a "best of" set it would be epic  

 

They're definitely capable of doing an entertaining 2,5 hour slot. And 99% chance they're gonna do a greatest hits set.  

[COPG]

26 minutes ago, simian_mobile_mushrooms said:

Foos seem a bit of a strange one really. I agree, I should like them too, given the genre. I like Royal Blood, I like QOTSA, I like RHCPs and the like, but Foos........ they're just so samey, their songs imo go at one speed. Sure they've got some exceptions but on the whole I guess I find them quite boring. Maybe as a result of nice guy Grohl's influence on their 'nice' rock? Depending on who else is on, I'll prob catch the start of their set just for a half hour/45 mins then see the Jacksons. Come with us if you like

That's my plan!!! I'll meet you by the flag

[chatty]

They are really good live, have good craic, got a load of hits that people will get into and sing along with, put a good show on, create a good atmosphere. 

I would say they are worth seeing if you enjoy their music but arent a huge fan. If theres a band you really like clashing then go see them but if theres nothing you really fancy on then id say they are worth seeing. 

I reckon itll be a good gig tbh.