Metallica

[eFestivals]

There isn't anything wrong with what he actually said though. Apart from the Hitler part I guess.

apart from the utter stupidity of all of it, of course.

[cheeseisamazing]

its too long...

[rexclark]

Kanye West coukld put on a decent show, or he could be a tedios shit. I'd rather they didn't bother with him TBH.

[jeanpierre80]

Complete bollocks.

Glasto has always been mainstream. It was originally called 'Pilton Pop Festival' and it's always had pop headliners.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Well I know you're a mister know it all re:festivals and i respect that, however you cannot but admit that commercial (pop) acts have invaded the headlining slots since 2007...If you take a look at the 80s and 90s, there have only been rock acts headlining the mainstages...not as heavy as Metallica for sure but still falling in the rock category...

The Smiths, Joe Cocker, David Bowie, Peter Gabriel, in the early years.....

Oasis, Pulp, The Cure, Radiohead, Blur, Skunk Anansie, REM in the 90s amongst may others...

Edited April 27, 2012 by thesecretingredientiscrime

[cheeseisamazing]

that's because unsuitable headliners for any fest = shit sales for that fest.

Glasto is a festival that has always had mainstream headliners. Why expect it to change what it does when no one would say the same about Download?

[willutalk]

Well they'd definitely do better than Gorillaz in 2010. Gorillaz are literally unheard of now, I've not heard of them doing anything since and they'd not headlined any major festival (not that I know of ) before their appearance at the festival. Metallica have had plenty of festival experience (Soni twice, R+L twice and Download three times and many other fests abroad) Although the genre is not the one Glastonbury aimes for. Metallica will have the want to play Glasto and they'll know their set inside out. Perhaps they'll take into account that Glastonbury isn't a metal fest but more of a pop/alternative/indie/mainstream fest and play there softer hits. Fade To Black and one would work well with the pyrotechnics Glasto are capable of putting on. Many of the older rock fans would know their bit about 'Tallica and the younger people know some as well.

[willutalk]

To add, it probably wouldn't be great getting Metallica to do 2013 as all the hype will be over more mainstream acts who others will prefer.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Well they'd definitely do better than Gorillaz in 2010. Gorillaz are literally unheard of now, I've not heard of them doing anything since and they'd not headlined any major festival (not that I know of ) before their appearance at the festival. Metallica have had plenty of festival experience (Soni twice, R+L twice and Download three times and many other fests abroad) Although the genre is not the one Glastonbury aimes for. Metallica will have the want to play Glasto and they'll know their set inside out. Perhaps they'll take into account that Glastonbury isn't a metal fest but more of a pop/alternative/indie/mainstream fest and play there softer hits. Fade To Black and one would work well with the pyrotechnics Glasto are capable of putting on. Many of the older rock fans would know their bit about 'Tallica and the younger people know some as well.

Edited April 27, 2012 by thesecretingredientiscrime

[cheeseisamazing]

Well they'd definitely do better than Gorillaz in 2010. Gorillaz are literally unheard of now, I've not heard of them doing anything since and they'd not headlined any major festival

Edited April 27, 2012 by cheeseisamazing

[willutalk]

I personally can't say much about the Gorillaz's set and generally about the band. Because I wasn't there. Some people said that they we're good but on the whole I did get the message that they lacked as a headliner. I shouldn't have have said "literally unheard of" I just was tryng to state from my point of view I rarely hear of them. You'd expect to hear a lot about a headliner for one of the biggest festivals in the world. Plus I am a bit of a metal head my self so Metallica would be a good booking but I know the mainstream world pretty well so I know about many other softer bands. I love Blur but I'm not so keen on the Gorillaz.

[cheeseisamazing]

fair enough, but tbh out of all the bands that have headlined Glastonbury the last 3 years i've been i probably hear the most about Blur and maby muse, i think the amount of press or anything u hear on the bands depends on the artist if i'm totally honest, it varies a lot

[eFestivals]

Well I know you're a mister know it all re:festivals and i respect that, however you cannot but admit that commercial (pop) acts have invaded the headlining slots since 2007...If you take a look at the 80s and 90s, there have only been rock acts headlining the mainstages...not as heavy as Metallica for sure but still falling in the rock category...

The Smiths, Joe Cocker, David Bowie, Peter Gabriel, in the early years.....

Oasis, Pulp, The Cure, Radiohead, Blur, Skunk Anansie, REM in the 90s amongst may others...

As I said, Glastonbury has always had pop acts as headliners. Where you're going wrong is by thinking that what was pop at the time isn't pop because it's rock.

They are (in the main; there's always exceptions) pop acts - in the charts - and commercial. Just because they might play guitars doesn't change that.

Against your list of "rock acts", I bid you back The Thomson Twins and The Chemical Brothers. But I'm sure there's plenty more that shows that it's never purely been about just 'rock' (in the broadest sense) if I cared enough about the headliners to remember them.

Rock music dominated all of music for 15-ish years, and so it's hardly surprising that a festival that has big popular commercial acts as its headliners had those headline slots predominantly filed with rock acts. That doesn't mean that it's a rock fest, it means it's been a festival taking place in a time of rock fashion.

The non-rock acts that have headlined in recent years have demonstrated not that the festival is changing it's booking policy (or going downhill, or however you might want to view it), but is demonstrating that music fashion has changed.

Glastonbury has been slow in reflecting that change (as have other fests), but I think that's more to do with the fact that those controlling the bookings are themselves pretty much wedded to the rock scene as a result of the time they've worked thru. Much as punk created its own new scene in the music biz where the old 'dinosaur' managers and agents were shut out in favour of a new breed (Malcolm Mclaren, for example), a similar thing has happened with the transition from 'rock' to 'urban'.

[Vieuphoria]

I think it'd be a fantastic booking.

[AcademicPistol]

How do you get the voting facility cheese?

[cheeseisamazing]

How do you get the voting facility cheese?

Edited April 28, 2012 by cheeseisamazing

[AcademicPistol]

Thanks bud don't know how i managed to miss that

It's just an old quote that i like not sure who is credited with thinking it up.

I just Googled it and found this website http://www.onelinerz.net/top-100-funny-one-liners/

And Metallica for Glasto!

[jeanpierre80]

As I said, Glastonbury has always had pop acts as headliners. Where you're going wrong is by thinking that what was pop at the time isn't pop because it's rock.

They are (in the main; there's always exceptions) pop acts - in the charts - and commercial. Just because they might play guitars doesn't change that.

Against your list of "rock acts", I bid you back The Thomson Twins and The Chemical Brothers. But I'm sure there's plenty more that shows that it's never purely been about just 'rock' (in the broadest sense) if I cared enough about the headliners to remember them.

Rock music dominated all of music for 15-ish years, and so it's hardly surprising that a festival that has big popular commercial acts as its headliners had those headline slots predominantly filed with rock acts. That doesn't mean that it's a rock fest, it means it's been a festival taking place in a time of rock fashion.

The non-rock acts that have headlined in recent years have demonstrated not that the festival is changing it's booking policy (or going downhill, or however you might want to view it), but is demonstrating that music fashion has changed.

Glastonbury has been slow in reflecting that change (as have other fests), but I think that's more to do with the fact that those controlling the bookings are themselves pretty much wedded to the rock scene as a result of the time they've worked thru. Much as punk created its own new scene in the music biz where the old 'dinosaur' managers and agents were shut out in favour of a new breed (Malcolm Mclaren, for example), a similar thing has happened with the transition from 'rock' to 'urban'.

[cheeseisamazing]

- for me thats really stupid....personally T in the Park has hit rock bottom...leave Guetta for Pacha club and Minaj for MTV....!

Legendary groups and artists - The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Zeppelin, Dire Straits, Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, Jimi Hendrix, Santana to name a few etc all surfaced into the music scene in the 60s and 70s....their hits will never die and will never be equalled by any band... dont get me wrong, we still had good bands in the 80s, 90s and noughties but they arent in the same calibre of the ones mentioned above.

[jeanpierre80]

Quoting you :

'This comment- Legendary groups and artists -Are You For Real, seriously just NO?. Shove some Muse, Nirvana, Chillies, Radiohead, Arcade Fire, RATM, The Cure,Blur, (TOO FUCKING MANY TO NAME) Or any other world class act down your throat and then reconsider. I'm sorry but music has evolved from the 60s and 70s and there are bands out there who have achieved a popularity rivaling those 60s bands. Maby the game has changed, maby the magic is lost a little and yes those bands still did a lot for music then perhaps any modern band could achive, but i will tell you now there are many hits since them that will certainly never die, there are bands that rival they're popularity, there are bands that still push the boundaries of music to levels that the Lennon may never of dreamed of, if you haven't seen a world class act and haven't been blown so high off your feet to a point that rivals any drugs- YOUR DOING IT WRONG!

To deny any band that path to become legends, just because of the legends of the past deny s music its evolution, denys an artist to reach the Ultimate Goal and to perfectly honest is nothing but a depressing thought. The idea that in 40 years my grand Kids Will not view the bands that i watched grow and inspired my life so much write them off because 'the legends were in the 60s' thats saddening man. (my kids will have good music taste, their getting allowance removed for every JLSesk album they buy)'

Take it easy bro - you're taking it too personal.. Its a matter of opinion after all...I do enjoy Nirvana, Blur, Oasis, Stone Roses, Muse as well and agree they are good bands, after all I grew up listening to grunge and alternative / indie rock or 'call it whatever you like' in the 90s but still for me they can't be classified as 'legends'

Edited April 30, 2012 by jeanpierre80

[cheeseisamazing]

sorry man. revising allnight and day. possible vented some anger in there

Point stands though they are legends or legends in making....

Only time will decide

[LondonTom]

Point stands though they are legends or legends in making....

Only time will decide

[cheeseisamazing]

Great point and all to often forgotten when we discuss current music. The fact it's current excludes them from being legends of yore. They are still here making current music, making the hits of this generation. I don't see how people can write any act off from reaching that stuff... (apart from the flavor of the month pop acts, but I guess even the Beatles started off as that to an extent)

[Whittick]

Not interested in them, they've done fuck loads of festivals I've been at in the last five years.

[biffoire]

that's because unsuitable headliners for any fest = shit sales for that fest.

It's nothing to do with being out of their comfort zone, unless by "out of their comfort zone" you're meaning bankrupt? Would the metal fest that is Download book Steps to headline? Of course not. Would you say that would be out of their comfort zone, or would you just say that was stupid?

Glasto is a festival that has always had mainstream headliners. Why expect it to change what it does when no one would say the same about Download?

Glasto is the only festival that's doing new things to any extent. There's exciting acts and big acts of all genres all around the festival and which have not been seen at UK festivals before or which rarely play UK festivals.

Metallica headline UK festivals every year, surrounded by the same old acts every single time. Who won't move from their comfort zone?