Gorillaz snobbery

[bombfrog]

Pathetic, really. This place is the most beautifully optimistic forum between March and June... from July to September it's horrific.

[Magma]

Could you explain why other people are 'pathetic' for coming on the boards and complaining whilst you, who has come on the boards and complained, are not 'pathetic'? Are there some things that are ok to complain about to avoid the 'pathetic' tag? Do you have a list?

Edited July 12, 2010 by Magma

[Mardy]

Loads of spot on stuff

[llcoolphil]

The impulse to immediately go online and complain about the bad bits of a very good experience strikes me as rather pathetic. Of course, a human can have many pathetic impulses whilst being a perfectly decent person - I wouldn't like to write people off as human beings for complaining about Glastonbury... I think you take my opinion a little too far (and seriously) if you make that leap.

It strikes me that if people spend the weeks after Glastonbury trying to eek out every negative in order to have something to talk about, they will tarnish the memory for themselves (and maybe others, when on the Internet). Glastonbury seems to precious to do that... if you don't like something on a stage, you leave... it's really simple; works the same at all festivals. The fault of seeing a disappointing gig really lies with nobody but the person that watched it.... yet people who accidentally saw a WHOLE HOUR AND A BIT (!!) of marginally disappointing entertainment would rather spend time criticising the bookers (who apart from this one arguable disappointment do a sterling job every single year under lots of pressure) than joking about the duff choice they made (could've been watching the Pet Shop Boys, George Clinton or myriad others).

Live music is live music - it's pretty unpredictable... it's not like any of us even paid specifically to see Gorillaz. The festival experience is about making the right choices - you always get some wrong, but the smiling faces in every crowd (even the Gorillaz one - I didn't see them myself, but my housemate was down the front and reckons they were the best thing she saw) are testament to the fact that it's the gig-goer who makes or breaks their own festival at Glastonbury, not the booker who had to arrange a replacement headliner at short notice.

I saw one (in my opinion) bad gig at Glastonbury... Florence and the Machine... somehow, I managed to leave and see Nouvelle Vague, who were amazing... in reaction, I'm kicking myself a little bit for missing the start of NV, but given that lots are saying Florence was their favourite bit, I wouldn't dream of taking out my frustrations on the bookers.

And anyway, if I'm not allowed to complain about people complaining then, well... just exactly what kind of hippy free-for-all is this supposed to be?

Edited July 12, 2010 by llcoolphil

[Magma]

Don't get me wrong I agree almost entirely with you. If you stay at a gig you dont like when there is a gazillion other places to be, you have to be daft unless you have to be there. And Ive said several times on these threads post Glasto that those that are moaning are talking nonsense the vast majority of the time - the stuff they are moaning about is often absolute twaddle. Nobody got 'dissed' for wearing jeans and a t shirt and nobody nearly died in an earth shattering crush for eg. I was pointing out the irony of complaining about people complaining, nothing more

[bombfrog]

How long are you supposed to give a gig before giving up on it and moving on?

If I left every gig I wasn't too impressed with after the third song then I'd probably have missed so classic moments. It also takes a long time to walk between stages so it would take a lot to get me to switch headliners half way through.

I really don't see where Magma is coming from on this, I don't get what we're supposed to do on this forum if it's not discuss the bands and the performances. Or are we only allowed to discuss the acts we enjoyed?

[strudders]

How long are you supposed to give a gig before giving up on it and moving on?

If I left every gig I wasn't too impressed with after the third song then I'd probably have missed so classic moments. It also takes a long time to walk between stages so it would take a lot to get me to switch headliners half way through.

I really don't see where Magma is coming from on this, I don't get what we're supposed to do on this forum if it's not discuss the bands and the performances. Or are we only allowed to discuss the acts we enjoyed?

Edited July 12, 2010 by strudders

[LondonTom]

So there is the issue.

(A)Should we all expect a crowd pleasing, full on perfect set from a band billed as a headliner? thus having some of the need for us to decide if its worth seeing taken away?

or

( Should we expect a band to perform the same set they have been performing on tour and thus only really pleasing the "true fans" who know what to expect, whilst at the same time disappointing those who thought (A)

[Mardy]

you see, i f**king hate the idea that a band plays lots of hits just because it's expected of them. Id want a little bit more from my artists that just crowd pleasing. Look at dylan in 66, neil young in 71, did what the f**k they wanted, alienated huge numbers of the crowd but created pure f**king art. I don't think it's an A/B situation

[strudders]

Well the answear is A) , I am not really sure what I expected of gorillaz, they played the hits. I don't know it didn't hit the spot with the crowd and that ruined it, but a band should at a festival be trying to please the majority and not a minority of die hard fans who follow you around.

[strudders]

Just to point out I was translating Magma's post...

why...?

how are you supposed to find out if you like a band without giving them a 'chance'?

(I gave them about 45 minutes... that was enough for me... I figured, even if they pull out the crowd pleasers at the end - which they did - the trawl through anymore wasn't worth it...)

[Wooderson]

That was good but snoop freestlying to Clint Eastwood was brilliant.

[strudders]

By some distance the most exhilarating moment of GF10 for me.

[airds]

you see, i f**king hate the idea that a band plays lots of hits just because it's expected of them. Id want a little bit more from my artists that just crowd pleasing. Look at dylan in 66, neil young in 71, did what the f**k they wanted, alienated huge numbers of the crowd but created pure f**king art. I don't think it's an A/B situation

[bombfrog]

By some distance the most exhilarating moment of GF10 for me.

[bombfrog]

you see, i f**king hate the idea that a band plays lots of hits just because it's expected of them.

Edited July 13, 2010 by bombfrog

[Mardy]

Yeah, it's terrible when bands come on and play stuff you like, isn't it. Whenever I'm at a gig and the artists is playing their best stuff and I'm really enjoying it I tend to leave.

See, that's more my kind of gig, the one where you feel totally alienated are the best.

Do you know who I really hate? that Fatboy Slim, he's probably the best example of somebody who just stands there behind a pair of decks and just plays stuff that the crowd want to hear. I hate going to see him (I've only bothered 4 times), the crowd never looks like they're having a good time. I don't know why he even bothers.

[Mardy]

1966 Dylan goes electric. Receives death threats, audiences walk out, the majority of his fans f**king hate it. Detest it. Roundly booed, 'Judas', the whole f**king works.

However, changed the face of popular music and now seen as f**king sublime works of genius by lots of people.

Now I love a good night going mental to some tunes (seen FBS etc loads of times), but it would be absurd to say that Fatboy Slim is a more important artist than Dylan, wouldn't you say?

[Magma]

How long are you supposed to give a gig before giving up on it and moving on?

If I left every gig I wasn't too impressed with after the third song then I'd probably have missed so classic moments. It also takes a long time to walk between stages so it would take a lot to get me to switch headliners half way through.

I really don't see where Magma is coming from on this, I don't get what we're supposed to do on this forum if it's not discuss the bands and the performances. Or are we only allowed to discuss the acts we enjoyed?

Edited July 13, 2010 by Magma

[just-spence]

I think you've missed my point there. Should an artist only please the crowd? is there room at for example a concert for an artist to challenge the crowd? would we have had any progress or revolution in music without that?

Genuinely, do you think an artist should only play what a crowd wants? can you not see any benefit in the other?

[amfy]

I'm not a massive Gorillaz fan. I have the first album and I like them. I went along because I thought they'd be interesting and they were. I thoroughly enjoyed them and so did my mum who knew they were a cartoon band but couldn't have hummed you a single tune.

I don't think it's about whether you were a fan, or knew any of your material, it's about what your expectations were. I expected interesting and wasn't disappointed, if i'd expected a big bouncy singalong I might've been. Expecting interesting doesn't make me better than someone who expected a bouncy singalong, but it doesn't make the Gorillaz shit either.

[strudders]

erm at a festival where the crowd is a mix . yes i do think they should play to please the crowd thats what they are there for .. to please the crowd . why else are they there ?? to make us misrable ? ffs the gorrilaz were shite !!! i hate to say this but dizzy rascle was far better ..and before the festival i was refering to him as attract a twat and he certainly played to please the crowd .. after dizzy rascle i went to the nearest food stall and asked for some humble pie

[just-spence]

In your Opinion....

Edited July 13, 2010 by just-spence

[MEGABOWL]

Again, you're making my views out to be rather more cartoony than they are. Let's be sensible, shall we?

Of course I'm not saying you should only discuss things you've enjoyed.. my post stemmed from frustration of having seen the Gorillaz mentioned again and again and again after the festival. It's not only needlessly negative, it's boring and repetative too. We all knew by Sunday that the Gorillaz had been a bit of a disappointment... yet people still feel the need to moan about it 3 weeks later. At this stage, clinging onto the negatives from your festival seems needlessly masochistic... not only could you not tear yourself away from a bad gig before it finished in favour of several amazing gigs around the site, you're keeping yourselves psychologically in front of it for weeks afterwards too - reliving the disappointment over and over again!

As for how long to give a bad gig... well, that's clearly a personal choice. Like I said yesterday, I was disappointed with Florence... my lady and I gave her about 15 minutes, which seemed fair at the time - it was long enough to realise it wasn't our thing and gave us enough time to see some of Nouvelle Vague instead. We decided against the Gorillaz entirely, because I was sceptical they'd have enough to fill a set and I'm well aware of Damon Albarn's penchant for gutless ethnic music. The Pet Shop Boys were amazing though, I didn't even think about leaving for George Clinton (who I hear from my brother was astounding too). Glastonbury really isn't the place to get yourself stuck with an act you're not enjoying.

However, far worse than sticking with an act you're not enjoying, is trying to transfer the blame for your own bad choice (as I said, I know people down the front who LOVED Gorillaz - so they played perfectly for certain elements of the crowd - my housemate spent almost the whole gig genuinely crying with joy apparently! She is known for that, mind...!) onto the bookers, who had the tough job of replacing U2 at short notice... I'm sure they cry themselves to sleep each night worrying about how you had 1 disappointing hour out of around 120 spend in their care. IT'S SUCH A SCANDAL!

People lay so much importance on the headliner, but you can't stake so much on them.... it's just one act out of hundreds available. It's not even the last act of the night for most people. If it ruined your Saturday night enough to have you still moaning about it 3 weeks later, well... you can't have being doing it right.

[Topless Skateboarding Nun]

erm at a festival where the crowd is a mix . yes i do think they should play to please the crowd thats what they are there for..